Butchers just cut cancer out of diseased meat and sell the rest of the contaminated carcass.

Explanation: ‘When We See Cancer in Pork, We Just Cut It Out And Still Sell It To Customers’ Claim

A February 2018 post (“An Experienced Butcher Admits: “When We See Cancer In The Pork, We Just Cut It And Still Sell It To Customers””) circulated widely on Facebook in October 2019, inspiring a fresh round of users vowing to never again eat any pork products.Images accompanying the post were presumably responsible for the viral spread of the claim, which were used to illustrate the purported discovery of cancer in pork on a butcher’s table:One widely circulated iteration was published by EducateInspireChange.org on February 20 2018:Meat eaters might want to reconsider their diet choices.A butcher has shocked the world by saying that when coming across cancer in pork, he and many other butchers just cut it out, and continue to sell to customers.When you buy meat from a butchers, you expect that you are usually buying the best quality, better than supermarket standard, but this has been shown not to be the case.Meat cuts are very expensive, and this butcher has been honest about the process that the meat goes through before selling. I guess it would be mad for a butcher to throw a whole cut away just because there was a problem with one part of it.There is no legal obligation for butchers to give information about cancers in the meant to the customers.The article strongly implied — but did not state outright — that the following image was part of the purported claim, and that the quoted butcher shared it as an example:In the above excerpt, the second half of the first paragraph linked to what presumably constituted the basis of the claim and headline. But it wasn’t a news item or other vetted claim; instead, the link simply brought users to a November 2017 tweet. That included an image of a different piece of purportedly diseased pork, along with an unverified claim:I worked in a meat market for 5 years, this is very true. pic.twitter.com/g7NWguDvSb— ☥Lucky☥ (@Wisethedome) November 16, 2017EducateInspireChange.org likely didn’t carefully read that tweet’s discussion thread. Although its headline described the Twitter user as an “experienced butcher,” they actually described themselves specifically as a one-time supermarket employee:I worked at one the largest grocery store retailers on the east coast and all the grocery stores get there meats from pretty much the same companies. You don’t have to believe me, I KNOW what I’ve seen.Notably, in the article excerpt above, EducateInspireChange.org contrasted this person’s knowledge as a purported butcher with that of an average supermarket worker in their content:When you buy meat from a butchers, you expect that you are usually buying the best quality, better than supermarket standard, but this has been shown not to be the case.To reiterate, their claim contrasting supermarket meat with butcher meat specifically was predicated on differences between the sources — but they got the information from a purported supermarket employee, contradicting their own stated reasoning.Furthermore, the Twitter user said that they were vegan, and that they regularly shared content about the dangers and perils of eating meat:I been vegan 6 years i been posting about this stuff, for years you just seeing it posted today. 🤷🏽♂Being vegan in and of itself is absolutely not cause to distrust a claim, but in this case, the commenter was a supermarket worker — not a butcher as was later claimed, and espoused a clear and admitted anti-meat viewpoint. From subsequent comments, it appeared that they did not actually describe themselves as a “butcher,” much less an “experienced butcher.”A screenshot included with the post featured an image not crawled until the tweet went viral in November 2017, and its source remains unclear. EducateInspireChange.org wasn’t even the first site to use “An Experienced Butcher Admits: “When We See Cancer In The Pork, We Just Cut It And Still Sell It To Customers”” as their headline. In December 2017, the site TheUnknownButNotHidden published an article with an identical headline:This guy said he’s been a butcher for 30 years and when he sees cancer in the pork he just cut it out then they still sell the meat to customers.Both articles included images that in part formed the basis of their claims. The same month the tweet appeared (November 2017), a commenter shared the image to Reddit’s r/ThatHappened, a subreddit where users share stories that, to them, seem obviously fake:Cancer in Pork from thatHappenedCommenters were divided; some mused that it was impossible to contract cancer from eating cancerous meat, and others asserted that the “tumor” was in fact garlic butter. Without a source, determining the circumstances of the image definitively was impossible. That particular image did resemble the Kiev style of wrapping meat around herbed butter, and the image looked like at least one image tutorial for pork Kiev.In October 2017, another Reddit user shared a similar image to the site’s r/whatisthisthing.Is this cancer in my pork? from whatisthisthingIn the top comment on that thread, a commenter claimed their butcher friend identified the substance and advised “those are glands and should not be eaten.” Another speculated the image showed “abscesses,” which might have a high concentration of bacteria.As for the other popular image depicting cooked, sliced pork, that too seemed to originate on Reddit via r/mildlydisgusting. That poster didn’t explain the image’s origin:Tumor in pork from mildlydisgustingIf that Reddit post was the image’s first appearance on the internet, the image was not presented as either originating with a butcher or showing cancer in retail meat. If it was accurately titled, the meat could have been obtained through a farm directly, or been raised by a private livestock owner. As no information was given, no explanation was certain.Rumors of cancer in meat circulated in 2012 and 2013 too, once again bolstered by images shared to Reddit and later removed from their context. In 2013, a post to r/skeptic included debate about the image. Originally, the same image (without captioning) was shared to r/popping — a subreddit devoted to draining pimples and abscesses.In the 2012 version, the submitter admitted to “finding” the image and not having taken it themselves. After the photograph circulated, the “cancer in pork” rumor spread on separate subreddits. In the 2013 r/skeptic discussion, a user opined:Looks like a spinal abscess, i.e a localised collection of pus separated from the surrounding tissue by a fibrous capsule. Happens occasionally. No respectable establishment is going to be serving that, though. It’s not sanitary, it stinks and the meat surrounding the abscess is toughened. Depending on the amount of contamination (those things can be quite pressurised and when cut into the puss will just spray out) a thing like that may lead to a large chunk, if not the whole of the carcass being condemned.Another self-identified “meat industry” insider agreed with the assessment, adding possibly informed context. According to that user, butchers and other meat processors don’t “just cut it and sell it.” All efforts are made to detect and discard diseased meat, although the individual maintained it happened solely through error:As someone who has worked in the meat industry for the last 8+ years, I can confirm that this is exactly right. We see these things all the time. Usually, they are caught and excised by QA’s or “meat inspectors”. Sadly though it is fairly common that they are missed. For around two of those 8 years, I worked in an area that involved sorting the “finished” product, and I was pretty disgusted to see how often these things are missed. It may not end up on your plate often, but it’s the middleman who will end up furious most of the time.In response to a question about how common such oversights are, the same commenter replied:[Chances you’ll see infected meat are very] small. It will get past the people who are too bored to do their job properly, but once it hits the butcher who’s selling to you, he has a very vested interest in keeping your food clean and presentable, lest he lose customers. Which is why it is he as the middle man who gets so frustrated. He just wants to sell an edible product, but ends up doing a lot of the work he has already paid the wholesaler for and he’s losing good product/weight due to careless work further back in the chain.Bottom line is that consumers really don’t need to worry about this. It’s not unheard of, but if it does happen it will be pretty obvious and you should most definitely take steps to make sure whomever is accountable is held as such.That comment was published in 2013, four years before the articles and tweet went viral. In it, the user correctly states that butchers have a vested interest in avoiding the handling and sale of infected pork and other meat — it harms their business and inhibits repeat custom. According to the two circulating articles, butchers finding cancer in meat “just cut it and sell it to customers,” a practice that would have only negative consequences for their business.A tweet embedded above that served as a citation for both articles was shared on November 16 2017. On November 21 2017, a butcher Jon Viner did a Reddit AMA (“ask me anything“) inviting questions about butchery from the Reddit community ahead of Thanksgiving:IamA butcher with more than 30 years of experience here to answer your questions about meat for Thanksgiving or any time of year. AMA! from IAmANeither of the two subsequent articles (“An Experienced Butcher Admits: “When We See Cancer In The Pork, We Just Cut It And Still Sell It To Customers”) had yet been published, but a user submitted a question with a virtually identical title:Is it true that if you see a cancerous part in the animal you just cut it out and keep the rest of the meat to cut and sell?Viner explained standard procedure for butchers when infected meat is discovered:No, at work when I come across something like that, we discard everything. We gotta clean our saw, we clean everything, that’s contamination. Like a cyst, something like that, we discard all the meat.Interestingly, the thread of questioning seemed to mirror claims that would eventually appear in the viral article. The next user asked if there was a correlation between high-end sources and supermarkets:Can you elaborate on this? Is that something that I would normally find on something I buy in a higher-end supermarket with a good butcher (like Stew Leonard’s)? Is there something I should look for?Viner again responded, adding that meat processors discard the entire carcass irrespective of whether the retail destination was “high-end”:No, there really isn’t [something consumers should look for]. It’s just like [illness in] people – you don’t know it until you find it, and when we do, we get rid of the whole animal. We don’t want to let our consumers have any of that.On November 22 2017, meat scientist Janeal Yancey, Ph.D. addressed what was clearly rapidly spreading viral nonsense on her meat-focused blog. Yancey said that friends had been asking her about the viral tweet quite a lot as it circulated.Yancey maintained that most meat “comes from young animals who would be very unlikely to have cancer, adding that any “animal with cancer would be very sick and would be condemned on the kill floor by the inspector.” Correctly observing that “pictures like these aren’t about safety or public health; they are about generating clicks and shares and fame for the originator,” she confirmed that the picture is “not cancer” but “an abscess, a localized infection that the animal’s body was fighting.”Yancey then reiterated what commenters had been saying for years, that there are “several barriers that keep abscesses out of a retail butcher’s hands,” explaining:Abscesses like this one would be very rare to find in a butcher shop. Our meat supply is one of the most inspected industries in the world. Not even hospitals and nursing homes are inspected like meat plants are. Employees of the USDA Food Safety Inspection Service inspect every single animal as it goes through the harvest process. In a big commercial plant, dozens of pairs of eyes will look at every carcass. When an abscess is spotted, it is removed immediately. If an animal has been sick, USDA inspectors will see the signs of illness in the animal’s lymph nodes and internal organs. Sick animals are condemned and not allowed to go into the food supply.As Yancey observed at the end of the post, the virality of such claims was itself an indicator that tumors or cancer in butcher meat or pork could not possibly be as common as rumors suggest. No good explanation was apparent for why more butchers didn’t speak out, but more compellingly, why Facebook and Instagram were not awash in images of pus-filled pork. TruthOrFiction.com has done numerous pages on extremely viral Facebook claims about contaminated food, and pork dripping pus is, as Yancey again noted, guaranteed “clicks and shares and fame for the originator.”Another element to the posts beyond their morbid fascination is the underlying question of whether you can get cancer by eating meat from an animal with cancer. That question is itself part of a larger question about whether cancer is contagious. As it applies to the possibility of eating cancerous-infected animals and subsequently developing cancer, the answer is “that’s not how it works“:In general, no. Cancer is not a contagious disease that easily spreads from person to person. The only situation in which cancer can spread from one person to another is in the case of organ or tissue transplantation. A person who receives an organ or tissue from a donor who had cancer in the past may be at increased risk of developing a transplant-related cancer in the future. However, that risk is extremely low—about two cases of cancer per 10,000 organ transplants. Doctors avoid the use of organs or tissue from donors who have a history of cancer.Finally, as LeadStories noted in a post about the rumor, the viral article falsely claimed there is “no legal obligation for the butchers to give information about cancers in the meant to the customers.” In actuality, animals found to be ill by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service “are not allowed to be slaughtered and are humanely euthanized.”This particular rumor may have been resurrected and driven by an April 2019 announcement from the Trump administration that regulations for the pork industry would be changing effective November 2019, limiting oversight and allowing the industry to monitor itself:Really big plants commonly have seven government inspectors working the hog line. One looks at the whole pig carcass, three look at the heads, and the last three are looking at everything else.So here’s what the Trump administration is changing, starting in November:The regulatory change has roiled public health watchdogs, who claim the changes give meat companies too much authority and not enough oversight. They claim the industry will easily be able to cut corners, which will ultimately expose the public to more foodborne pathogens.There’s quite a bit to recap about the two articles titled “An Experienced Butcher Admits: “When We See Cancer In The Pork, We Just Cut It And Still Sell It To Customers,” one of which appeared to have been shared nearly a million times on Facebook. The “experienced butcher” in question was just a random Twitter user who claimed to have worked in a supermarket; he did not claim to have been a butcher. Images published with the articles came from random Reddit threads. Meat processors and butchers do in fact have a legal obligation not to process or sell meat from diseased animals, and protocol for finding disease includes discarding the entire animal and disinfecting all equipment. Contradicting the rumor also is a large dearth of similar images. And finally, grossness aside, you can’t become infected with cancer by eating meat from a sick animal — but the USDA still prohibits the slaughter and sale of diseased meat.


American Samoa to begin mass measles vaccination this week.

Explanation: Health officials in the U.S. territory of American Samoa say they will begin mass measles vaccinations later this week.

Health, Measles, General News, American Samoa

At a meeting Sunday, officials said the vaccinations would be given for seven days starting Friday. There are nine confirmed cases of measles in the island territory. American Samoa Health Department Epidemiologist Dr. Aifili John Tufa says five of the island’s cases were in people who had been traveling and the others were locally transmitted. On Friday, American Samoa officially declared a measles outbreak, a move that closed public schools Monday and prohibits gatherings in parks. In the neighboring independent nation of Samoa, more than 60 people have died, mostly children, from the measles and more than 4,000 were infected since the outbreak started in mid-October.


U.S. President Donald Trump said state governors must "treat me well" in order to obtain masks and ventilators from federal reserves.

Explanation: What's true: Trump asserted that state governors "have to treat us well" while discussing the coordination of federal and state efforts in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. What's false: Trump did not say governors must "treat me well" or rhetorically ask them if they "want ventilators and masks from the federal government's reserves to treat your citizens."

As state governments attempted — sometimes contentiously — to coordinate with the U.S. federal government in obtaining supplies and equipment needed to deal with the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic in March 2020, President Donald Trump suggested, according to news reports, that “governors should show some appreciation first”: President Trump said he’s working well with governors across the country as both the federal government and the states battle the coronavirus pandemic. Trump singled out his working relationship with California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), with whom he’s clashed in the past over issues like homelessness. And everyone else, it seems, remains in communication with each other and the White House as the country develops some semblance of a coordinated plan. But, there’s a catch. The president said governors can’t simply tell him they want assistance and expect the administration to comply in the blink of an eye. Instead, he suggested governors should show some appreciation first. More specifically, a quote meme that was widely circulated on social media held that Trump had overtly declared that if state governors wanted to obtain masks and ventilators from government reserves, those governors “have to treat me well”:  Although the meme was based on something Trump said, the wording and context it offers differs somewhat from what actually took place. During a Fox News Virtual Town Hall event with Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and members of the Coronavirus Task Force on March 24, Trump was asked whether his working with state governors was proving helpful in stemming the spread of the coronavirus. In his response, Trump both complimented and criticized the way in which governors had been working with him: DR. SIEGEL: So I was really encouraged to see you reaching out to governors — Governor Cuomo, Governor Newsom — making liaisons that weren’t there before. Do you think that that kind of movement, where you’re the leader and other people work with you, will help us to isolate the virus in the epicenters where they are — to separate out those epicenters, to test the people in those centers, and to thereby squash the virus? THE PRESIDENT: I do. I think, Doctor, it’s a very good thing. And Governor Newsom and I have been getting along really great. We’re sending the ship — the great hospital ship, as you know. And we are doing very well with, I think, almost all of the governors. For the most part, it really has become something. It’s — it’s — we’re dealing almost every day. We’re speaking to each other, whether it’s conference calls. Usually we’ll have 50 governors on the call at the same time. No, I think we’re doing very well. But, you know, it’s a two-way street. They have to treat us well also. They can’t say, “Oh gee, we should get this, we should get that.” We’re doing a great job, like in New York, where we’re building, as I said, four hospitals, four medic — we’re literally building hospitals and medical centers. And then I hear that, you know, there’s a problem with ventilators. Well, we sent them ventilators. And they could have had 15- or 16,000; all they had to do is order them two years ago. But they decided not to do it. They can’t blame us for that. Although Trump mentioned ventilators in his response, he said nothing about masks, nor did he address state governors and rhetorically ask them, “You want ventilators and masks from the federal government’s reserves to treat your citizens?” That sentence was someone else’s attempt to provide implied context for the sentence that followed it in the meme, but it was misleadingly placed inside quotation marks as if it were something Trump had literally said. Also, in his response, Trump did not say that governors (or anyone else) “have to treat me well.” As documented in the above transcript and the following video clip, Trump asserted that “they have to treat us well”: On Governors asking for help, Trump says, "It's a two way street they have to treat us well too." …. (realized i had wrong clip before) pic.twitter.com/gXM83TCUZR — Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) March 24, 2020  Viewers could reasonably infer that the pronoun “they” referred to governors, but the referent for the “us” who needed to be treated well in Trump’s mind was somewhat ambiguous. Was he referring to the federal government? To his administration? To the coronavirus task force? Or to himself personally (via the royal we)? In what manner Trump meant governors had to “treat us well” was also ambiguous. By not criticizing him or his administration? By publicly expressing praise or appreciation? By making concessions on issues unrelated to the current pandemic? Trump did indeed suggest governors needed to engage in some form of behavioral quid pro quo in obtaining assistance from the federal government to respond to the coronavirus pandemic, but not as literally or specifically as the wording in the meme displayed above asserts. During a press briefing three days following the town hall event referenced in the text meme, Trump more specifically suggested that his choice would be not to respond to governors who did not express sufficient appreciation, although he allowed that Vice President Pence (who chairs the coronavirus task force) was in fact choosing to engage the supposedly unappreciative governors:  Q: So it’s the words [the governors are] saying that you’re concerned about? It’s not that they’re —


An Indian man who was bitten by a snake then bit his wife because he wanted them to 'die together.'

Explanation: Alternative facts should keep this alive though.

A story out of India about a man’s fatal encounter with a snake and his “romantic” gesture toward his wife has spread online, but with little in the way of corroboration. The Gulf News reported on 12 June 2017 that Shankar Rai was bitten by the snake while asleep in his home in the village of Birsingpur, but became “emotional” when he woke up to discover his condition was getting worse. The story went on: Apparently realising that he won’t survive for long, he came rushing to his wife Amiri Devi and bit her hands saying he loved her very much and wanted to die together. Both fell unconscious soon, witnesses said. Immediately they were rushed to a local government hospital where the man died soon after being admitted there. However, the woman was saved by the doctors due to timely medication. “The woman could be saved as her treatment began on time. She is safe now,” a local medical practitioner Dr Jaykant told the local media on Monday. However, the story failed to give the doctor’s surname (“Jaykant” is usually a given name) or elaborate on anonymous “reports” it cited as a source for the story. The story was subsequently picked up by web sites in not only India, but the United States. Those stories, though, did not add any details adding to the original report, leaving open the question of “Dr. Jaykant’s” identity, among other details. We contacted Shri Pranav Kumar, the magistrate assigned to the Samastipur district (where Birsingpur is located) by the Indian Administrative Service seeking comment. He has not responded. We also contacted the Gulf News seeking more details about its report, but have yet to hear back. We also reached out to several zoos and medical experts, as well as the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, to ask whether it is possible to poison someone by biting them after being bitten by a poisonous snake. Scott Lafee, a spokesperson for the school of medicine at the University of California-San Diego, told us: Our experts quickly and summarily dismissed the idea as “fake news. Can’t happen.” Frank Burbink, a research associate in the herpetology division at the American Museum of Natural History, dismissed the idea just as bluntly: Great story. Sounds like an excellent case to try in court. Love it. But no, there is no way to transfer venom from an envenomated person to another victim by biting them (or probably any other way).


Haitian orphan gets nation's first 3-D printer prosthesis.

Explanation: A 12-year-old orphan boy handicapped from birth became the first recipient of a 3-D printer prosthesis in Haiti last month, thanks to a British-born software engineer in California.

Born without fingers on either hand, Stevenson Joseph had little hope of treatment in a country where programs for the disabled are rare apart from a handful of charities. Now the 3-D prosthesis fitted to his left hand has given him a whole new range of dexterity, including being able to play catch with his friends for the first time and maybe even enabling him to write one day, according to staff at the home for disabled orphans where he lives. In 2010, Stevenson was brought to Bernard Mevs hospital in the capital, Port-au-Prince, where an orthopedic team was working to fit prosthetic limbs after a devastating earthquake caused injuries that required amputations. “We couldn’t do anything for him here,” recalled Thomas Iwalla, a Kenyan orthopedic technician at hospital. “Some congenital conditions, like Stevenson’s, are pretty hard to tackle. Not even surgery could repair his missing fingers,” he said. On a mission trip to Haiti for Florida-based Food for the Poor last year, John Marshall and his wife Lisa, met Stevenson at the Little Children of Jesus orphanage where he has lived since he was abandoned when he was 3 years old. Back in California, Marshall read an article about Richard van As, a South African man who developed a plastic prosthetic “Robohand” using a 3-D printer after losing his fingers in an woodwork accident in 2011. Marshall and van As worked for months to design a 3-D print prosthesis for the Haitian boy. “Stevenson is handicapped in a small way, in a way that’s not as bad as some of the other children, yet his hands are holding him back. He can do so much more. He has the potential,” said Marshall. After three attempts, the skeleton-looking prosthesis was ready and shipped to Haiti where Bernard Mevs hospital medical team fit Stevenson with it last month. “A printed prosthesis is more anatomical and it allows more motion than the one that is usually custom-made,” said Iwalla, an orthopedic technician at the hospital. Also, once the model is designed, printing the prosthesis cost only around $300. “Some patients care more about cosmetics. But for Stevenson function is the most important criteria. That’s what is in his mind. His robot-hand makes him happy, makes us happy,” said Iwalla. Instead of shooting ink to print words or images in a page, 3-D printers use plastic or metal to build three-dimensional objects ranging from jewelry to guns. Stevenson now spends his days getting used to his new hand. “It is a great hand,” he smiled, ticking off his list of accomplishments. “Now I can take a balloon with it. I can score at basketball. I can hold a TV remote and push my friends on their wheelchairs. I can hold a water bottle, a bag. I like it a lot.”  The 3-D device, articulated by Stevenson’s wrist, makes a slight creaking plastic sound when moving. “Some say that now he looks like a robot, but Stevenson doesn’t care,” said Edouard Williamson, one of the staff at the orphanage.


Explanation: This release explains the results of a small clinical trial testing whether the use of a new drug, fevipiprant, would be effective in reducing the serious symptoms of asthma. It does a good job of reporting data on the primary goal of the research and then slips when suggesting the research had other positive outcomes but fails to provide any data backing that up. The release is further weakened by its inclusion of what is basically a testimonial for the new drug by one of the participants in the study. And it fails to mention either costs or possible harms from using the drug, and ignores some rather substantial conflicts of interest among the investigators. The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute says more than 22 million Americans have asthma, including about 6 million children. There are many more millions with the condition worldwide. A daily pill that might alleviate serious symptoms of the disease, or even prevent asthma attacks, would be a boon to public health, especially considering some of the shortcomings of other current treatments. New medications to treat the underlying problem, namely airway inflammation, are needed and would translate into improved health for this very common and sometimes serious medical problem. This release may have helped spawn two news stories that we also reviewed that had glaringly different story framing. One was by Reuters and the other by Medical Daily. The latter of the two didn’t offer “anything beyond what is in the news release,” according to reviewers.

The release does not mention the cost of the potential new drug, nor is there any estimate of what the cost might be in comparison to other asthma treatments currently in use including inhalers and corticosteroids. The release would have been more helpful to people with asthma if it had included some cost estimates since new medications tend to be very expensive. If it’s not too early to promote a treatment to a patient audience, it’s not too early to provide a ballpark cost. If this release would have only discussed the primary outcome goal of the study — “to examine the effects on inflammation in the airway by measuring the sputum eosinophil count” — then we’d probably give it a satisfactory rating on this category since it provided clear numerical data showing a significant reduction in percentages among patients taking the drug versus those on placebo. But the release didn’t stop there. It had the principle investigator add glowingly, “A unique feature of this study was how it included measurements of symptoms, lung function using breathing tests, sampling of the airway wall and CT scans of the chest to give a complete picture of how the new drug works.” If these additional measurements were so significant in the study, then why was that data excluded from the release? We need quantification of the actual results of the clinical tests to be able to judge benefits. It’s particularly important to note side effects associated with new medications but the release makes no mention of any harms arising from the drug’s use in the study. However, the full research paper (which unfortunately is behind a paywall) includes a table of adverse events experienced by both the experimental group and patients receiving a placebo that include problems such as infections, respiratory disorders, gastrointestinal and nervous system disorders. While these may ultimately have been minor problems, they deserve mentioning. This release does a good job of explaining the nature of the research and the resulting data (as far as the sputum eosinophil count data goes). As mentioned above, it falls short in providing other indicators which would have strengthened it considerably. But readers are given a clear idea of the degree of improvement the drug provides to patients in terms of the reduction of eosinophil in sputum, compared to those receiving only a placebo. The release verges on disease mongering given some of the exuberant language, particularly from the patient testimonial, but it stops short by noting how many asthma suffers there are in the UK. Asthma is a common and often-serious health problem so giving some context was beneficial. The release gets credit for including the funding sources of the study — Novartis Pharmaceuticals, the National Institute for Health Research in the UK, and the European Union — but it fails to point out any of the linkages among the study’s authors to pharmaceutical firms. According to the published study disclosures, these relationships include speaking fees, consultancies, grants and full-time employment with Novartis and other companies. This transparency is needed for readers to ascertain bias. The release makes no mention of alternative treatments for asthma. There is no comparison with current approaches such as inhalers and corticosteroids or any other approaches regarding this illness. There are a variety of established treatments that are used according to standard protocols depending on asthma severity. The release is fairly clear in pointing out that this was a clinical trial and that the drug, fevipiprant, isn’t available to the public as of yet. The release claims novelty with the statement, “The first new asthma pill for nearly 20 years has the power to significantly reduce the severity of the condition.” That’s not correct. In recent years, several new drugs known as leukotriene receptor antagonists have come on the market in the U.S. as tablets. The release gets credit for having a conservative headline — “Asthma pill could reduce symptoms in severe sufferers” — but then loses it when it allows the main researcher to proclaim, “This new drug could be a game changer for future treatment of asthma.”  Then it follows that up with what basically is a testimonial from one of the participants in the study who says, “I felt like a completely different person” after taking the drug, adding, “For me, it felt like a complete wonder drug and I can’t wait for it to be available because I really think it could make a huge difference to me.”  She closes by saying that after stopping taking the drug, her health started to “go downhill again very quickly.”  Her comments may be factual and might fit well in marketing advertising but they have no place in a news release explaining new health research. Interestingly, the University had also issued a second release related to the same research but not linked in the original release, that offered commentary from two unaffiliated experts. One offered that “The data strongly support further studies,” while the other said, “More research is needed and we’re a long way off seeing a pill for asthma being made available over the pharmacy counter.”  Both comments would have improved the value of the initial release, had they been included.


South Dakota plans mass testing in elder care facilities.

Explanation: South Dakota health officials are planning to test everyone in nursing homes and assisted living facilities over the next month, Gov. Kristi Noem announced Thursday.

Sioux Falls, Health, General News, South Dakota, Assisted living, Nursing homes, Virus Outbreak, Native Americans, Elder care, Kristi Noem

The Department of Health will be working with facilities that care for the elderly to test over 26,000 people in the coming weeks. Nursing homes have been most susceptible to deaths from COVID-19, with one Sioux Falls facility recording 20 deaths, according to the Argus Leader. “It’s a foundation for us and our response moving forward,” said Secretary of Health Kim Malsam-Rysdon. The state has acquired more supplies needed for tests, allowing them to hold mass testing events. Health officials also plan to conduct random testing among vulnerable people to try to catch infections before they spread. Malsam-Rysdon said the state is also planning to hold mass testing events in Native American tribal communities, starting with a mass testing event with the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate next week. Noem has feuded with two tribes over coronavirus checkpoints they set up on federal and state highways last month to keep unnecessary visitors off the reservations. On Friday, she threatened to sue the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Oglala Sioux Tribe if they did not remove highway stops within 48 hours. The governor backed away from that plan this week, offering to negotiate on the issue if they would take them off of U.S. and state highways. Noem said both tribes responded to letters she sent, saying they would consider the plan. But they have not taken down the checkpoints. Still, Noem said it was encouraging they didn’t reject the plans outright. She said she hoped the conflict could be settled out of court. “We are working through our process,” Noem said. “I’m hopeful that we can come to a resolution.” But the Rosebud Sioux Tribe announced on Wednesday it will be setting up highway checkpoints to enforce a lock down on the reservation after 14 people tested positive for the coronavirus. Meanwhile, health officials recorded four more COVID-19 deaths and 60 new confirmed coronavirus cases on Thursday. The new figures bring the state’s death toll to 43 and its confirmed case count to 3,792. State officials said the count does not reflect the total number of infections because many people may not display symptoms or have not sought testing if their symptoms are mild. All of the deaths reported Thursday were in Minnehaha County, the state’s most populated area. About 80% of cases in the state have come from the county. The economic fallout from the global pandemic has also continued to cause layoffs in the state, according to the Department of Labor and Regulation. State officials reported that 5,131 people made new claims for unemployment last week. A total of 23,791 people are receiving unemployment benefits, according to the latest available count. “About eight weeks ago, it was like a light switch was flipped,” said Labor Secretary Marcia Hultman. “Claims instantly and to a degree never-before-seen began to hit our system.”


Winona assisted living facility offers housing for students.

Explanation: There’s a new housing option for students at Winona State University.

But it helps to be good with letters and numbers. “B 11, B one one,” nursing student Ashley McGaw is calling the day’s bingo game in the basement meeting room at Senior Living at Watkins, an assisted living center. In her senior year, McGaw chose to take part in the student residence program at the facility, which is run by Winona Health. It’s a new program that allows up to 10 students to reside in the Watkins Manor for $400 a month. That fee covers utilities, Wi-Fi, cable and three meals a day in the facility’s cafeteria. There’s one catch: The students have to volunteer 10 hours a month in the assisted living facility, which is connected to the mansion, Minnesota Public Radio News reported. If they volunteer 20 hours a month, rent goes down to $200 a month. “It’s a steal,” said McGaw, who moved in this August. McGaw works a summer job as a certified nursing assistant in Wisconsin. So, the arrangement is a perfect fit for her, she said. “I was like, ‘This is the coolest idea ever.’ I always wish I could just sit down and hang out with residents and just talk and do life with them, instead of doing my job and trying to do life with them,” she said, talking about her summers working as a certified nursing assistant. “So, this is just like one of the coolest opportunities that just honestly fell into my lap and I’m so happy.” She’s not the only one. “I think that’s wonderful, so they can be close to us and we can have an association with them,” said Alan Thompson, who has lived at the assisted living facility for two years. “They learn about us; we learn about them because I think most of us as elders do not know enough about what confronts the younger generation.” There are 46 residents in the assisted living wing of the building. A squat building connects the facility to the mansion where the students live. The mansion is filled with ornately carved woodwork, an early Steinway grand piano and large paintings in elaborate gold frames. The home, which was built in a Jacobethan — or English Renaissance Revival — style, was built between 1924 and 1927 for Paul Watkins, who ran the J.R. Watkins Company for several years. The mansion was donated to the local Methodist church in the 1950s and became part of a senior living facility. For several years, older adults lived in the mansion. But, for a variety of reasons, the home shifted all those residents into the newer wing of the building. Cheryl Krage, director of assisted living and hospice services at Winona Health, said the mansion isn’t built for wheelchairs or walkers. “Regulations for the elevator have made it a little more challenging,” she said. “That’s where we had the opportunity to do something different.” McGaw, the student, lives in a spacious third-floor room with high ceilings, a large window with painted glass inserts and a giant fireplace framed by tiles. Resident Nancy Neumann, a former nurse, said the students help the residents enjoy getting older. “We are like grandparents to the young people and they are like our grandchildren, which is a joy,” she said. ___ Information from: Minnesota Public Radio News, http://www.mprnews.org


Nobel winner and organ transplant pioneer Joseph Murray dies at 93.

Explanation: Dr. Joseph Murray, the surgeon who carried out the first successful kidney transplant and later won a Nobel Prize for his work in medicine and physiology, died on Monday in Boston at the age of 93.

Murray died after suffering a stroke last Thursday, Brigham and Women’s Hospital spokesman Tom Langford said. Murray and his team completed the first human organ transplant in 1954, taking a kidney from one identical twin and giving it to his twin brother, opening a new field in medicine, the hospital said. “The world is a better place because of all Dr. Murray has given. His legacy will forever endure in our hearts and in every patient who has received the gift of life through transplantation,” hospital president Dr. Elizabeth Nabel said in a statement. Later in his career, Murray continued to search for ways of suppressing a patient’s immune response to prevent it from rejecting foreign tissue, eventually becoming a co-winner of the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1990. “Difficulties are opportunities. This is a quote that sits atop my father’s desk at home. It reflects the unwavering optimism of a great man who was generous, curious, and always humble,” his son Rick said in a statement. Murray began a career in medicine on graduating from Harvard Medical School in the 1940s, and developed an interest in transplanting tissue while working with service personnel injured in World War Two, according to the Britannica Online Encyclopedia. He completed his surgical training at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and later returned to join the staff and serve as chief of plastic surgery. With broad interests beyond medicine, Murray said in a brief autobiography for the Nobel Prize organization that he and his extended family had been “blessed in our lives beyond my wildest dreams.”  “My only wish would be to have 10 more lives to live on this planet. If that were possible, I’d spend one lifetime each in embryology, genetics, physics, astronomy and geology,” he said. “The other lifetimes would be as a pianist, backwoodsman, tennis player, or writer for the National Geographic.”  More than 600,000 people worldwide have received transplants since Murray’s innovation, the hospital said.


All the really great programs in American history, Social Security, was done without Republicans. Medicare was done without Republican support until the last vote where they realized they had to get on board.

Explanation: Dean claims Social Security and Medicare were passed without Republican support

National, Health Care, History, Medicare, Howard Dean,

With virtually no Republican support for the health care reform bill, some Democrats believe they will have to go it alone. But Howard Dean, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, isn't worried about the political repercussions. When asked about the risks of abandoning efforts for a bipartisan bill, Dean had this to say:   "All the really great programs in American history, Social Security, was done without Republicans. Medicare was done without Republican support until the last vote where they realized they had to get on board," Dean said on the Aug. 25, 2009, episode of  The Rachel Maddow Show  . "So a lot of the things that have been done that have helped seniors in particular have been done without Republican support at all and there's not going to be any political penalty. The only political penalty will be suffered is if we don't pass a bill and the Republicans know that. And that's why they're not interested in helping pass the bill." Our recollection about the votes on Social Security and Medicare was a little rusty, and we wondered whether Dean was right that both bills passed with no Republican support. To find out, we had to turn back the clock to 1935 — the height of the Great Depression — when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act, an insurance program funded through taxpayer dollars meant to support retirees. The legislation was controversial for a number of reasons, including its perceived effects on the labor market and whether its benefits favored working white men. Nevertheless, on Aug. 8, 1935, the conference report — the final version of the bill that melds together changes made in the House and in the Senate — passed in the House 372-33, with 81 Republicans voting in support. The next day, the bill was passed in the Senate 77-6, with 16 Republicans supporting the legislation. So Social Security did pass with Republican support. Thirty years later, a significant number of Republicans voted in favor of the Medicare bill. The House adopted the conference report on July 27, 1965, 307-116, with 70 Republicans supporting it. And on July 28, the Senate adopted the final version of the bill by a vote of 70-24, with 13 Republicans in favor of the bill. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law on July 30, 1965. But is Dean correct that the Republicans didn't support Medicare until the end? Donald Ritchie, the associate historian in the U.S. Senate, told us that the Republican support wasn't just a last-minute phenomenon. During the discussion of both bills, "There were always progressive Republicans and liberal Republicans, some of whom supported Roosevelt and Johnson," Ritchie said. Johnson had the political muscle to pass Medicare because the 1964 elections ushered in 42 new Democrats to the House of Representatives, giving the party a two-thirds majority overall and a larger majority on the Ways and Means Committee, where the legislation would originate. Up until then, many members of the committee, including its Democratic chairman, Wilbur D. Mills, opposed the idea of government-funded health care. In fact, Mills proved a tough sell in 1965 until some of his own pet proposals were added to the legislation. One of those — the addition of a voluntary, supplemental health care plan — had its roots in a Republican alternative bill. In the House, no Republicans voted for the bill until it reached the floor. It passed the Ways and Means Committee by a party-line vote of 17-8, although the panel's GOP members endorsed some of the bill's non-health care related provisions, according to the 1965  Congressional Quarterly Almanac  . Likewise, all four Republicans on the House Rules Committee — the panel that sets the boundaries of debate on all bills that come to the House floor — voted against the bill. In the Senate, however, there was Republican support in the Finance Committee. When the panel cast its final vote, the bill passed 12-5, with four of the committee's eight Republicans supporting it. (President Barack Obama would probably love to get even that much GOP backing.) So we find Dean is glossing over the details and exaggerating the partisan split. Both Social Security and Medicare were indeed championed by Democrats, but passed with the help of Republican votes. And while some GOP members waited until the last minute to support Medicare, it was backed by half the Republicans on the Senate committee. So we find Dean's statement .


Washington state man who traveled to China is first U.S. victim of coronavirus.

Explanation: A Washington state man who recently traveled to China has been diagnosed with the coronavirus, becoming the first confirmed U.S. case of the newly identified illness that has killed six people in China and sickened some 300 others across Asia.

The patient, identified only as a man in his 30s, fell ill over the weekend after traveling to his hometown in China and was diagnosed with the coronavirus on Monday, Washington Governor Jay Inslee told reporters at a press conference in Seattle. “This is not a moment of high anxiety,” Inslee said, reporting that the man was listed in satisfactory condition at Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Washington and not known to have infected anyone else. “This is a low risk. It appears to have a transmission vector that really should not prevent anyone from going anywhere in Snohomish County, except maybe the isolation ward at the hospital,” Inslee said. The coronavirus, which causes respiratory symptoms similar to a cold or flu, has been linked to a seafood market in Wuhan, the largest city in central China with a population of about 11 million. That market has since been shut down. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Washington State say the agency is preparing for more U.S. cases of the coronavirus to emerge, and the CDC raised its travel alert for Wuhan to a level 2, calling for enhanced precautions. Under that alert level, the CDC recommends travelers to Wuhan should avoid contact with sick people, animals or animal markets. At the Seattle press conference, CDC Medical Officer Satish Pillai said that all travelers from Wuhan would be directed to five U.S. airports - in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Atlanta and San Francisco - for screening. CDC officials said they have begun tracking down individuals who came in contact with the patient, who lives alone, to check them for symptoms, but so far have not found any additional patients. Besides the United States, cases outside of China have been reported in South Korea, Thailand and Japan. “I don’t think looking at what we know so far that this it on the scale of SARS and MERS, the two most significant coronavirus outbreaks that we know from history,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, from the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, said in a phone interview with Reuters. “It is early days in this outbreak and we don’t have a good handle on the severity of illness,” Adalja added. The CDC said it has screened more than 1,200 passengers since Jan. 17. None of them have been sent on for additional testing. The U.S. traveler from Washington state had returned on Jan. 15, arriving at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, which is not on the U.S. list for enhanced screening. The patient sought care at a medical facility in Everett, Washington, and was treated for the illness. Based on his travel history and symptoms, healthcare professionals suspected the new coronavirus. Specimens were taken from the patient and sent to the CDC for testing. The agency said it has developed a new test that allowed it to identify the presence of the virus in a traveler. As is often the case, preliminary information suggests  older adults with underlying health conditions may be at increased risk of severe disease, according to the CDC. The agency is working with health officials in China and globally to better understand the virus and any potential treatments, but U.S. officials have said it could take at least a year of testing before any vaccine could be used on the public.


Wisconsin sold fresh water to California, helping that state's dairy industry, and "lost a bunch of jobs (and) a bunch of farmland.

Explanation: Kaleka said Wisconsin sold fresh water to California and "lost a bunch of jobs (and) a bunch of farmland." There’s no evidence of such a water sale, something that would have made for countless front-page stories, let alone it leading to a loss of jobs and farmland in Wisconsin. The statement is false and ridiculous. You can comment on this item on the Journal Sentinel's web site.

Agriculture, Jobs, States, Water, Wisconsin, Amardeep Kaleka,

After their father and five other worshippers were shot to death on Aug. 5, 2012 at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wis., brothers Amar and Pardeep Kaleka became active with Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Pardeep said in a video for the national group, of which the Oak Creek and Milwaukee mayors are members, that 34 Americans are murdered with guns every day. Ten months later, Amar (also known as Amardeep) stepped into an even more public role, announcing plans to run in 2014 against eight-term U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, the 2012 Republican vice-presidential candidate. Kaleka, a 35-year-old Democrat and documentary filmmaker, was interviewed about his planned candidacy on the Oct. 20, 2013 edition of "Upfront with Mike Gousha," a public affairs program on WISN-TV (Channel 12) in Milwaukee. When Gousha asked Kaleka what he would say to people who might view him as a one-dimensional candidate focused on guns, Kaleka turned the conversation to the economy. "I mean, gun legislation is just one of the many things that are holding us down economically. A number of other things, immigration reform, the economic disparity that we’re experiencing, has to do with our thoughts and models that we’ve had in place for now, well over two decades," he said. "I mean, the Midwest is a great example of how we’re losing so many factories and manufacturing jobs and agricultural jobs. For example, we used to be called America's Dairyland. Now, California is called America's Dairyland. We sent them fresh water, and we sold it to them. Ultimately, we didn't get anything in exchange. We lost a bunch of jobs, a bunch of farmland." It’s been two decades since California eclipsed Wisconsin in milk production, although Wisconsin still calls itself America’s Dairyland. But we’ve never heard that Wisconsin had sold fresh water to California to boost their dairy industry -- and lost jobs and farmland in the process. Wouldn’t there have been a titanic hue and cry if that had ever happened? Big ideas To be sure, there have been some grandiose proposals to sell Great Lakes water to faraway places. In 1998, a Canadian company actually obtained a permit from Ontario to ship fresh water by tankers from Lake Superior to Asia. But after a backlash in Canada and the United States, the permit was canceled two weeks later. In 2007, Democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson raised the possibility of exporting Great Lakes water to the Southwest, calling for a national water policy and saying "states like Wisconsin are awash in water." But less than two weeks after Richardson’s comments rattled Midwest politicians, his campaign issued a statement saying Richardson "in no way proposes federal transfers of water from one region of the nation to the other." The following year, the eight Great Lakes states reached agreement on the Great Lakes Compact, which bans Great Lakes water from being "diverted," or piped out of the basin, with a few exceptions, such as the possible sale of Lake Michigan water from Oak Creek to another Milwaukee suburb, Waukesha, which is under consideration. Even then, Waukesha would have to return 100 percent of the water by volume to the lake by discharging treated wastewater to the Root River in Franklin. Even with the compact, officials remain wary of outsiders coveting Great Lakes water, said Tim Eder, executive director of the Great Lakes Commission, an interstate agency that promotes the development, use and conservation of water in the Great Lakes basin. So, was there a Wisconsin sale of fresh water to California before the 2008 compact? "No way. It's really simple," Eder said of Kaleka’s claim. "He’s wrong. I don’t know where he’s getting his information, but it’s not based in fact." Two other experts -- Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources water use section chief Eric Ebersberger, and Peter Annin, managing director of the University of Notre Dame Environmental Change Initiative, which does research on water resources -- were also dumbfounded and emphatic: No water sale to California has ever occurred. And if it never occurred, it certainly didn’t boost the dairy industry there, or mean lost jobs or farmland here. Indeed, federal figures show that in 2012, Wisconsin produced 27.2 billion pounds of milk, a record for the state, and led the nation by producing 2.79 billion pounds of cheese. Said Annin, author of "The Great Lakes Water Wars": "I’m not aware of any instance where the State of Wisconsin, or anybody in the state of Wisconsin, sold water to California. There’ve been a lot of weird proposals, but they’ve never actually happened." We also checked with the federal Mississippi River Commission, which assured us that water from the Mississippi River was never sold to California. Kaleka, meanwhile, told us he meant to say "we thought about sending them fresh water." He added: "I'm going to have to take my hit on this. It was a sloppy response to a very big problem of local and national economics." But on even that he is off. None of the information Kaleka provided us indicates that Wisconsin even considered selling water to California. And we could find no record of it. Our rating Kaleka said Wisconsin sold fresh water to California and "lost a bunch of jobs (and) a bunch of farmland." There’s no evidence of such a water sale, something that would have made for countless front-page stories, let alone it leading to a loss of jobs and farmland in Wisconsin. The statement is false and ridiculous: . You can comment on this item on the Journal Sentinel's web site.


A world first: AIDS vaccine cuts the risk of HIV infection by 31 percent in large Thai study

Explanation: This was a very nicely written piece presenting the results of the first successful AIDS vaccination trial. Using an appropriately cautious tone, this story effectively informs the reader of the vaccine’s availability, novelty and efficacy. The story also does a good job of describing the study methods and accurately points out that the same results may not be seen in the U.S. given that study took place in Thailand where HIV is spread largely through heterosexual sex. Additionally, the expert commentary puts it nicely in perspective from a public health standpoint. While the story meets many of our criteria, it could have been improved by mentioning potential harms and making it clear that this research has not yet been published, and that others have raised questions about the lack of data and details that have been released.

Since the vaccine is not available, a discussion of costs is not warranted. The piece does a nice job of presenting the results in terms of absolute and relative risk reduction and makes it clear that the benefits of the vaccine are modest and additional research is needed. The story mentions that the vaccine cannot infect patients with HIV, but there is no further discussion of adverse effects or lack thereof. According to the International Data and Safety Monitoring Board, there were no reported safety concerns. While this story provides an excellent overview of the study population, methods and potential limitations in its generalizablilty, it fails to mention that the data have not been yet been published in a medical journal. Unlike published articles, this study has not gone through a rigorous review process. The Washington Post story, for example, included questions based on the lack of data and details that had been released. This story does not engage in disease-mongering. It was very specific about the numbers of newly infected people per year and annual estimated deaths. This story provides comments from those involved in the trial, as well as from independent sources. This story gave at least a brief historical perspective on past vaccine research. It mentions that the latest study participants were given condoms and STI prevention counseling; however, emphasis on how a vaccine would only be part of a comprehensive HIV prevention strategy would have been useful. This story clearly states that this vaccine is not yet available and may not be for several more years. The story indicates that this is not the first attempt at an AIDS vaccine; however, the positive results from the recent trial are uNPRecedented. The story does not appear to be based on a press release.


Low-Calorie Diet May Lead to Longer Life

Explanation: This article reports on a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, â€œthe first rigorous test of calorie restriction in people who are overweight but not obese.â€ The story states potential benefits of calorie restriction without providing adequate context for understanding what it would take to maintain adequate nutrition long-term. People were paid $7,000 to be in the study and all the food consumed in the study was provided to the participants to ensure adequate nutrition. The story didn’t explore the long-term practical implications of that approach for the average American. The long-term effect of maintaining body weights in the range supported by calorie restriction has not yet been established. This is an important caveat before concluding that the evidence demonstrates that such limits in caloric intake are beneficial.

Everything has a cost. Yet the story gave no cost estimate for the costs associated with consumption of foods ‘high in nutrients but low in calories.’ The story didn’t quantify the suggested benefits (decreased insulin level, decreased body temperature, drop in thyroid hormones, and decline in DNA damage) gained by the study participants. And the study didn’t mention the parameters that failed to demonstrate change during the study (protein carbonyl, glucose, and dehydroepiandroestrone sulfate (DHEAS). This article does a good job of highlighting the weight regain that occurs when peoples’ adherence to a dietary program that provides all the food ends. However, there was no mention of potential side-effects or harms of long-term calorie restriction such as decreased testosterone, muscle mass or bone density. This article reported on the results of a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes from 4 groups. There is no framework provided to assess the magnitude of potential improvement. Presentation of the results follows the opinions of the authors of the study without critical examination of that interpretation. There isn’t any discussion of how many Americans are overweight but not obese, so we can’t judge the story unsatisfactory on this criterion. However, we are tempted to do so when the story states, without attribution or evidence to back it up: “The notion that going hungry could be the fountain of youth has captivated scientists and the public.” The main expert quotes in the story came from people with a vested interest in showing positive results. Evan Hadley of the National Institute on Aging (source of funding for the study) called the results of this pilot study “striking”. In addition, an estimate for the number of individuals currently engaging in calorie restriction appears to have been obtained from the president of the Calorie Restriction Society. While this study is one of three pilots studies for the feasibility of calorie restriction in humans, no comments from the other research groups was included. The story is about calorie restriction in overweight but non-obese people. But no alternative treatment options are discussed. The story mentions ‘people experimenting on themselves’, indicating the potential for anyone to self-impose calorie limitations on themselves. However, the article failed to explain that all the food consumed by the research subjects in the study was provided for them thus ensuring nutritional adequacy while restricting calories. That’s beyond the reach of the average American. People were paid $7,000 to be in the study! This is not a novel ‘treatment’ for the length of life, notwithstanding the quote from Dr. Hadley from the National Institute on Aging stating that “There’s never been a study like this one”. This research is actually one of three pilot projects; results of the other two were published in 2005. The story explains that this “is the subject of intense research, and some people have already begun trying it on their own.” And it explains that there is no data in non-obese but overweight people. We can’t judge if the story relied solely or largely on a news release.


New recommendations for managing menopausal symptoms in breast cancer survivors

Explanation: This news release lists several non-pharmalogical steps for relieving menopausal symptoms of women who have been treated for breast cancer. The main takeaway is that most women who have been treated for breast cancer shouldn’t receive hormone therapy, but instead focus on lifestyle changes although some emerging pharmacologic approaches were listed as well. It’s not clear from either the news release or the published study how researchers drew their conclusions. The release states that clinical trials, observational studies, guidelines, and expert opinion were analyzed, but no study data is provided to put the findings in perspective. Women who are dealing with premature menopause as a result of breast cancer treatment would benefit from a better understanding of risks and benefits of treatments. The news release states that there are 9.3 million breast cancer survivors worldwide but doesn’t note, as the study does, that 43 percent of these are older than 65 at diagnosis and thus would not have menopausal symptoms due to chemotherapy for their breast cancer. The study also notes that 25 percent of those diagnosed are below age 50 and are thus more likely to be pre-menopausal at diagnosis. By not including those breakdowns the news release makes chemotherapy-induced menopause seem more prevalent than it is.

The report lists a variety of methods for reducing menopausal symptoms, but no costs associated with any of the methods are mentioned. Many of the recommended methods — like cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnosis and acupuncture — may not be covered by insurance or even available to many women depending on their location. No numerical context is given in the news release showing how lifestyle modifications might benefit breast cancer survivors with menopausal symptoms. For example, did any of the studies find an association between smoking cessation and reduced hot flashes or nighttime sweating? A breast cancer diagnosis may be incentive for women to make healthy lifestyle changes. Knowing the benefits of each of the lifestyle modifications mentioned would help women decide which change they would like to make. No harms were mentioned in the release. The only nod to harms was the recommendation that women who were treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer should not be treated with hormone therapy. The news release mentions that the results were based on a comprehensive review of “controlled clinical trials, observational studies, evidence-based guidelines, and expert opinion from professional societies.” Unfortunately, in neither the release or the original article is there a description of the criteria used to determine which articles were used in the review. Before the quality of evidence can be assessed we need to know some basics: How many women were included in the studies? How long were the studies? What were some limitations? The review did not commit disease mongering. However, by omitting the breakdown of breast cancer survivors by age the release might give the impression that chemotherapy-induced menopause symptoms are higher than they actually are. As noted above, the study states that 43 percent of these women are older than 65 at diagnosis and would not have chemotherapy induced menopausal symptoms. The release doesn’t state any funding sources. Several of the review authors have received industry funding and any relevant industry funding should be noted in the release. The release lists things women should do to help relieve menopausal symptoms, but there are no comparisons of which ones may be more beneficial. Knowing which ones offered the strongest benefits would help women decide on which approaches to follow. It’s unrealistic to suggest that all women would be willing or able to make all of the modifications recommended. We’ve all heard these messages throughout our lives. A cancer diagnosis may be the incentive needed to make changes but women deserve to know which changes have the potential for the greatest  benefit. Although lifestyle changes are readily available, it’s unclear if the emerging approaches (“selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), Tissue selective estrogen complex (TSECs), estetrol, and neurokinin B inhibitors”) listed in the release are even available. Some of the recommended lifestyle changes aren’t available to women with limited access to healthy foods which are often more costly even if they are available. Lack of insurance coverage and lack of availability of alternative treatments like cognitive behavior therapy, acupuncture and hypnosis put these modifications out of reach for many women. Besides listing lifestyle approaches which are not novel, it’s unclear if the emerging approaches listed are novel. The release did not use unjustifiable language.


Explanation: Incorrect. Respiratory droplets can land on surfaces and the virus in these droplets have been shown to remain viable for up to 72 hours on some surfaces.

You cannot catch Covid-19 from touching surfaces. Viruses are dead material expelled from healing cells. Everyone has thousands of viruses inside their body. There is debate about whether viruses are technically alive. The human body does contain a number of viruses that don’t do harm. Covid-19 is caused by a virus that is potentially very harmful though. Masks decrease oxygen intake, increase carbon dioxide intake, increase toxin intake, increase stress levels which directly impacts the immune system in a negative way making us more susceptible to illness. Claim 1 of 4


Southern Illinois University starts marijuana, hemp research.

Explanation: Southern Illinois University is creating new programs for students who want to know more about marijuana.

Medical marijuana, Agricultural science, Marijuana, Illinois, Science, Carbondale

The school announced last week that it’s creating programs at the Carbondale campus to study medical marijuana and industrial hemp. Officials hope the programs will give students and farmers a chance to earn a new certificate in the subject. Officials have been planning for the new programs for years, said Karen Midden, interim dean of agricultural sciences. “We’re getting this request and input from stakeholders, who are reaching out to us, telling us they need the science,” Midden said. “But we’re also getting it from students — current and potential students — that they would like to have programs to prepare them for work in these areas.” In joining the growing number of colleges around the country to offer courses related to marijuana, Southern Illinois University’s interdisciplinary program in cannabis science will be a mixture of agriculture and plant biology with courses in subjects ranging from chemistry to business to engineering. “Both of these crops — hemp and medicinal cannabis — show benefits in numerous areas, all the way from health and quality of life to having another natural fiber that can be used in so many ways,” Midden said. “We want a program to support this emerging industry. They need the science we can provide, and we are positioning ourselves to help.” Southern Illinois University researchers already have approval from the Drug Enforcement Administration to grow hemp. School leaders said they hope to begin planting in the spring on a 5-acre parcel of land, which will be split into a series of individual test plots to study specific research questions, such as the crops’ optimal growing conditions and environmental impact. Illinois has permitted the sale of medical marijuana since 2015, but only to patients with a few dozen documented conditions. Gov. Bruce Rauner signed legislation in August that expands access to medical cannabis and permits its use as a painkiller. Rauner also lifted a state ban on planting hemp.


Crisis averted, hospital ship leaves LA; treats 77 patients.

Explanation: Seven weeks ago a Navy hospital ship pulled into the Port of Los Angeles to provide relief to the city amid fears it was about to become the next epicenter for the coronavirus pandemic after New York City. But Los Angeles so far hasn’t been overrun with virus cases, and on Friday the massive USNS Mercy left after treating just 77 patients.

Los Angeles, San Diego, Health, General News, New York, Gavin Newsom, Virus Outbreak, Eric Garcetti, New York City

Tugs pulled the  Mercy away from its dock shortly after 7 a.m., and the vessel headed south down the coast back to its home port of San Diego. The ship with 1,000 hospital beds was a powerful symbol of the federal government’s response to the pandemic and was welcomed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti when it arrived at the end of March to provide beds for non-coronavirus cases to take the load off regional medical centers expecting a surge of COVID-19 patients. Garcetti noted the ship immediately became his city’s largest hospital. The city averted the worst predictions, and so the Mercy didn’t play a huge role as a safety net. The ship instead dealt with its own small outbreak on board with nine crew members testing positive for the virus in April. No patients are believed to have been infected while on the ship. About 750 crew members were sent to stay at nearby hotels. The Navy removed all but 250 hospital beds to ensure social distancing and prevent another outbreak. That same month, the Navy began sending its medical staff to skilled nursing facilities that were facing staff shortages because of outbreaks. About 60 medical staff assigned to the ship will remain in the Los Angeles area. Some personnel were also sent from the Mercy to aid the USNS Comfort in New York City. That ship initially planned to treat only non-coronavirus cases like the Mercy. But as the city became overwhelmed and doctors criticized the Navy for having empty beds on board, it started accepting coronavirus patients. It left New York on April 30 after treating 182 patients during its month docked there. In the end, the 894-foot-long (272 meter-long) converted supertankers designed to treat mass casualties from international conflicts treated only a fraction of patients relative to their capacity as the grim outlooks improved. For most people, the new coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness and lead to death, and nursing homes have been hit hard. The Mercy performed a total of 36 surgeries on its non-coronavirus patients, including an operation that marked the first time a pacemaker was repaired aboard a Navy ship. The last patient left the ship May 5. The Navy’s storied hospital ships could be used again if a second wave hits. Mercy’s Capt. John Rotruck said in a statement that he couldn’t be “more proud” of his sailors who came from bases across Southern California and quickly learned to work as a team seamlessly. “We came together and accomplished every task we were given,” he said. _____ Watson reported from San Diego.


U.S. obesity epidemic propels fitness as career.

Explanation: As the American waistline continues its spread, fitness is shaping up as one of the hottest careers of this tepid economic recovery.

Employment of fitness trainers and instructors is expected to grow by a brisk 24 percent in the decade to 2020, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, as businesses, health professionals and insurance companies take sharper aim at the sedentary lifestyle. “The obesity epidemic has produced a lot of noise and talk and chatter,” said Cedric Bryant, chief science officer of the American Council on Exercise (ACE), which has certified more than 50,000 fitness professionals. “Helping individuals be more active is important and fitness professionals can be at the center of that,” he said. Obesity rates have sky-rocketed in the last 20 years. More than one third of adults in the United States are obese, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Bryant said the health crisis is strongly linked to the lifestyle choices that fitness professionals, such as personal trainers and group fitness instructors, address. Despite the shaky economy, health club membership is up more than 10 percent over the past three years, according to IHRSA, the International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association. Exercise physiologist and ACE spokesperson Jessica Matthews said workplace wellness campaigns also increase demand for fitness professionals. Bryant said the average salary for a certified personal trainer is about $53,000 and rising. A high school diploma is sufficient to begin a career in fitness, he added, although more than two-thirds of professionals have college degrees. Matthews said the industry attracts career changers driven by the downturn to reinvent their working selves. “In the last few years people have been coming from all different industries,” said Matthews, who has worked in fitness for 12 years. While you don’t need college to enter the field, she said, continuing education is a must to remain in it. “It’s accessible, but it involves a great commitment,” she explained. “There’s the preparation and study for the exam, and then the requirement of continuing education to stay current.”  Bryant said the individual must re-certify every two years. Matthews, who is qualified in group fitness, personal training and yoga, said the most successful trainers are the constant learners. The obesity epidemic is the United States is also a contributing factor. “There’s a huge push from the weight standpoint,” she said. “Most people come to fitness professionals with weight goals.”  Bryant said the profession is about more than aesthetics: it’s about making a connection with the client. “It’s called personal training for a reason,” Matthews explained. “You’re an educator, a motivator, someone who holds them (clients) accountable. You coach individuals. At the end of the day it’s customer service.”  Husband-and-wife team Phil and Michelle Dozois opened their mom-and-pop gym, BreakthruFitness, in Pasadena, California, just as the economy was tipping into free fall. “We opened in 2009, pretty much when the economy fell apart, said Phil Dozois. “We had both been working in gyms for 15 years, me as trainer, my wife as group exercise instructor.”  The Dozois envisioned and created a club where people buy only what they need. Dozois said his programs range from eight-week weight loss to total conditioning. “People will pay more money for it if there’s a start-finish,” he said. “For us it’s been really successful financially.”  When he hires a new fitness professional, Dozois said he looks for a person with a pleasing personality who is open to learning. “They don’t have to be fit, as long as they’re on the path to fitness. I believe they should walk the walk,” he said. (This story was refiled to correct the spelling of Dozoirs to Dozois throughout)


Explanation: This story adequately describes the current study and provides the appropriate caveats to interpreting its results. The story could have been improved in the following ways: 1. By providing more detail on the specially-designed type of acupuncture used in one arm of the study. Where could a woman seeking this treatment find it? How many practitioners are trained on this regimen? 2. By mentioning any harms of the treatment. While acupuncture is very safe, the study did report some pain and bleeding. 3. By seeking the perspective of an independent expert and not simply quoting the lead author of the study. 4. By describing the costs or insurance coverage for acupuncture. Because insurance coverage for acupuncture varies widely, out-of-pocket expenses for the 12-session regimen could be a substantial barrier to many women seeking treatment. Interviewing only the lead author may provide an incomplete perspective of the significance of the findings.

The study makes no mention of costs or insurance coverage. Because insurance coverage for acupuncture varies widely, out-of-pocket expenses for the 12-session regimen could be a substantial barrier to many women getting the treatment. We note a couple of flaws: Acupuncture is very safe, however there are some potential undesirable side effects that were reported in the study and that should have been mentioned. The story adequately describes the design of the current study and provides appropriate caveats, such as the small sample size, the fact that this is a single study that has not yet been replicated and the lack of comparison with proven treatments such as psychotherapy and antidepressant medications. The story doesn’t exaggerate the seriousness or prevalence of partum depression. The story quotes only the lead author on the study. The story should have quoted additional, independent experts who could have provided much needed perspective on the importance of – or limitations of – these new findings. The story mentions other established, safe and effective treatments for depression such as psychotherapy and antidepressant medications. While acupuncture is widely available, the story doesn’t clearly point out that the regimen used in the study was specially developed for this study. Where could a woman seeking this treatment find it? How many practitioners are trained on this regimen? The story explains that the study is "the largest to date examining the effectiveness of acupuncture to treat depression in pregnant women." However, the story could have mentioned that the regimen used in the study was a novel regimen specially-designed for the study. There is no way to know if the story relied on a press release as the sole source of information.


North Carolina man charged for not treating syphilis.

Explanation: A 19-year-old man faces a criminal charge for refusing to get treatment for syphilis after health officials identified him as the “point of contact” for three cases of the disease in Cumberland County, North Carolina.

Health, Fayetteville, North Carolina, Syphilis

The Fayetteville Observer reported Thursday (http://bit.ly/29kyr1W) that Deyzaun Ford was charged June 28 with a misdemeanor public health violation for ignoring the Cumberland County Health Department’s order to manage and treat his syphilis within five days. The department can criminally charge someone who refuses treatment or intentionally spreads communicable diseases. Court documents did not say whether Ford intentionally exposed others. Police arrested Ford on June 19 in response to a suspicious vehicle report. He was separately charged with a misdemeanor for carrying concealed weapons without a license. The Associated Press emailed his attorney for comment. ___ Information from: The Fayetteville Observer, http://www.fayobserver.com


Biblical bad guys the ancient Philistines came from Europe, DNA shows.

Explanation: The ancient Philistines, the Biblical villains whose origins have puzzled scholars for decades, came to the Middle East from southern Europe more than 3,000 years ago, new DNA testing has shown.

The genetic findings came from skeletons unearthed by archaeologists in Israel in 2016, including the bones of infants buried beneath Philistine houses, archaeologists said in a paper published on Wednesday. The much-maligned group is regularly depicted as the enemy of the Israelites in Biblical texts. The giant Goliath was a Philistine. So was Delilah who entrapped legendary warrior Samson. Thanks to their bad press, their name has also become synonymous with crassness, ignorance and hostility to culture. But for all their prominence, where they came from before settling the coast of what is now southern Israel and Gaza remained a mystery. Varying theories had asserted their ancestors originated in the Aegean, or the northern Levant or that they were actually a local culture. “Our study has shown for the first time that the Philistines immigrated to this region in the 12th century (BC),” said Daniel Master, director of the Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon, a coastal city where the first ever Philistine cemetery was found. “We didn’t show it by showing similar styles of pottery, we didn’t show it by looking at texts, we showed it by looking at the DNA of the people themselves,” Master said. “We can see at Ashkelon new DNA coming in from this immigrant population that is really changing the whole region.”  The Ashkelon team sent more than 100 skeletal samples to Germany’s Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. DNA was found in ten individuals, particularly in the inner ear bones that preserved it over the millennia. The findings, published on Wednesday in the journal Science Advances, showed three stages: pre-migration, migration, and then a dilution of the genetic footprint within the local population a couple hundred years later. Although the genetic modeling suggests southern Europe as the area of origin, there are some limitations to 3,000-year-old DNA testing, said Michal Feldman, an archaeo-geneticist who worked on the study at Max Planck. “This ancestral component is derived from Europe, or to be more specific, from southern Europe, so the ancestors of the Philistines must have traveled across the Mediterranean and arrived in Ashkelon sometime between the end of the Bronze age and the beginning of the Iron age,” Feldman said. “There would be a lot more that we can say if we had more data, for example we could maybe more precisely pinpoint the source of this migration,” she said. Earlier work by the Ashkelon team has suggested the Philistines were actually no "philistines". Excavations of a 3,000-year-old cemetery in 2016 found bodies buried with jewelry and perfumed oil. (reut.rs/2LBBkxd)


To deprive" underprivileged children "of a meat-based protein during school lunch is most likely depriving them of their only source of protein for the day.

Explanation: Todd Staples airs smoky claim about children not getting protein unless they're served meat

Children, Education, Texas, Todd Staples,

Todd Staples, the Texas state agriculture commissioner, recently described a veggie-based dietary awareness campaign in the schools as an activist movement that degrades children’s nutrition to push an agenda. Meatless Monday is pretty self-explanatory; it’s an awareness campaign that encourages people to abstain once weekly from eating meat. The program was born in 2003 as a health initiative out of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health with stated goals of improving people’s health and lowering fuel and water costs of food production by encouraging lower meat consumption. It has since spread to participants that include hundreds of schools, universities and restaurants in 24 countries. But the arrival of the Baltimore-based program at three elementary schools in the Dripping Springs Independent School District made Staples "very concerned," he said in a Sept. 8, 2014, commentary in the Austin American-Statesman. For Staples, excluding meat is not just a matter of taste – it’s a blow to daily nutrition, especially if students are not well nourished at home. "It is important to remember that for many underprivileged children the meals they eat at school often represent their best meals of the day. To deprive them of a meat-based protein during school lunch is most likely depriving them of their only source of protein for the day," Staples wrote. Was Staples right about kids getting shorted? Let’s look at the meals that drew his ire, then explore if affected children are not getting needed proteins. Warning: Flames ahead. Dining options on a Meatless Monday Generally in Dripping Springs, lunching students may select up to one meat/meat alternate, three fruit or vegetable dishes and one grain or milk dish. If a child forgoes a meat/meat alternate, he or she is allowed four fruit or vegetable dishes. A student must take a minimum of three dishes with at least one serving of fruit or vegetable. On any day, of course, there's a chance a child won't choose to eat any protein dishes. The lunch menu at Dripping Springs Elementary, which participates in Meatless Mondays, runs on a three-week cycle. On the first Monday, when meat is not an option, the school offers vegetarian chili with cornbread, grilled cheese sandwiches, assorted vegetarian soups, cheese nachos, a baked potato with fixings, "healthy" refried beans, crunchy vegetable dippers and chilled pears or fresh fruit. On the second Monday of the school’s cycle, the menu includes cheese ravioli, vegetarian chili, cornbread, mozzarella sticks with marinara, a baked potato with fixings, spinach salad, green beans, apple sauce and fresh fruit. On the third Monday, the cafeteria offers black bean burritos, bean and cheese burritos, vegetarian chili, corn bread, cheese nachos, a baked potato with fixings, "healthy" refried beans, "carrot babies" with ranch, chilled sliced peaches and fresh fruit. This is a Meatless Monday menu from Dripping Springs Elementary, as presented online by the school. Staples’ backup information By email, Staples spokesman Bryan Black pointed out the website of First Lady Michelle Obama’s school nutrition program, Let’s Move, hosted by the federal government and affiliated with the White House, which says: "Many children consume at least half of their meals at school, and for many children, food served at school may be the only food they regularly eat." We heard from Black before Staples announced he plans to resign to become president of the Texas Oil and Gas Association. Black said the website "is dedicated to healthy lifestyles for children and confirms the message from Commissioner Staples" that many students might not have access to protein at home.


Experimental Test May Warn of Premature Births

Explanation: But we wish it had given even a little context of what’s done to help predict prematurity now instead of the vague quote from the researcher saying “the test ‘should be an important tool for an obstetrician who currently has no clue’ if premature birth is a possibility until it happens. …Physicians will ‘be able to use a simple blood test and then know that this woman is at increased risk or reduced risk of a preterm birth.’ ” As the story later made clear, this research is a long way away from being able to prove that claim. Most of our criteria were addressed in this story, yet more context and more independent expert perspective focusing on the data reported in the study would have been helpful. The most challenging fact – which wasn’t addressed – is that we lack interventions to use at and after 28 weeks that effectively prevent preterm birth.

The story included an estimate that “The test may cost $150 to $250.” Mixed bag here. We’ll give it a somewhat satisfactory grade. Here’s why. The story stated that the test “predicted 80 percent to 90 percent of the premature births at 28 weeks of gestation. The false positive rate — referring to tests that wrongly indicated premature birth — was 20 percent. The test wasn’t as effective at 24 weeks of gestation.”  It didn’t give any numbers to back up the experience at 24 weeks. But we would have appreciated somewhere a note that it is the very early preterm births that are the most crucial to predict. The story fixates on 28 week testing. What’s really needed are means to identify and study the 23 to 28 weekers. The story also doesn’t acknowledge that we have no effective interventions to stop preterm birth and somewhat incorrectly explains how betamethasone for lung maturity works. It also had an independent expert’s quote: “If you are going to be alarming a patient by saying that she may have premature delivery, you want to make sure that’s truly the case.”  That’s a very important contribution to the story. It mentioned that the false positive rate was 20%, so we’ll give it a passing grade. We wish, though, that it had included some expert comment on the significance of a false positive rate that high. We’ll give it a satisfactory score, but because very high in the story it stated that “The test isn’t ready for prime time, however, and it’s not foolproof: a study found that it misses some premature births and incorrectly predicts others.” The story gave estimates of how many births are premature, so did not commit overt disease-mongering. The story quoted one independent expert; it could have been improved with more comment from her or from others. The story didn’t comment on any other research in this field – nothing on any other investigations into what can be done to better predict prematurity. So this one study on this one approach is reported in isolation. The big gap that is unaddressed is that we don’t have any treatments even if we know someone is at high risk. In effect, we would be “alarming” lots of patients to no particular end at this point; unless they have had a prior preterm birth and are eligible for progesterone treatment but use of that preventive intervention starts at 16 to 22 weeks and is not relevant to the new test. It’s clear from the story that “It would require several years to go through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process.” The story never put the new test into the context of other research attempts to study what to do to predict prematurity. So its real novelty – and role – isn’t clearly established. It’s clear that the story did not rely solely on a news release.


Inoculations give endangered California frog a shot at life.

Explanation: Endangered California frogs are getting an immunity boost from scientists who are scooping them up from remote Sierra Nevada ponds and sending them to big city zoos for inoculation, giving them a fighting chance to beat extinction, officials said Wednesday.

San Francisco, Frogs, Parks, North America, National parks, Canyons, California, Science, U.S. News

The experiment aims to rescue the 3-inch mountain yellow-legged frog — named for distinctive coloring under its hind legs. Scientists use nets to capture diseased tadpoles and then fly them by helicopter from their natural range deep within the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. They are next driven over 200 miles (322 kilometers) across the state to the San Francisco and Oakland zoos, where they are inoculated against a ravaging disease partly blamed for wiping them out from much of their historical range in the Sierra, scientists said. Roughly 385 frogs have been treated at the zoos and returned after two years as healthy, young adults to their native lakes and ponds. Aquatic ecologist Danny Boiano of the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, who has led the three-year project, said it appears to be paying off. Next, his team will study their frogs to determine if it’s working. “It’s experimental at this point,” he said. “It’s going to take several years to find out if it works.” The frog holds a key place in the Sierra Nevada food chain. Scientists say they feed on insects, then snakes and birds eat the frogs. The species once thrived in such masses that people could not walk the shores of lakes and ponds in the mountain range without stepping on them, according to historical accounts, which add that with each step, dozens more launched into the water. Their decline began a century ago with the introduction of non-native trout for sport fishing that gobbled up the tadpoles. Starting in the 1960s, the frog suffered a second blow from an invasive disease, called the chytrid fungus. The fungus is blamed for the decline and extinction of more than 200 amphibians worldwide, scientists say. Today, the mountain yellow-legged frog is missing from 90 percent of its historical region in the Sierra. Both state and federal wildlife authorities have listed it as endangered. At neighboring Yosemite National Park, the frog’s population has made a significant recovery in part because rangers stopped stocking some lakes with non-native fish, park officials say. Inoculating the frogs in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks costs roughly $175,000 a year, which Boiano said mostly goes to pay his team of 10 seasonal biologists doing field work. “Just like vaccinating people, we are jump-starting their disease-fighting immune systems,” said Jessie Bushell, director of conservation at the San Francisco Zoo. “Letting the population completely die out is not a good option.”


An email claims that the use of antiperspirants is the leading cause of breast cancer.  The theory is that toxins are released by sweat, especially under the arms, and antiperspirants are blocking the release of the toxins, allowing them to build up, and the result is cancer.  It also claims that nearly all breast cancers are in the upper, outside quadrant of the breast, near the armpits.

Explanation: Breast cancer can be caused by underarm antiperspirants

According to the American Cancer Society and several other respected medical authorities, the use of antiperspirant does not cause cancer. Additionally, sweating is not the prime way the body gets rid of toxins, so even if the pores under the arms were clogged, that would not doom the body to an accumulation of cancer-threatening build-ups. According to the American Cancer Society, the upper, outside quadrant is not the site of “nearly all” of breast cancers, but about half that. For more information:  The American Cancer Society (Do a keyword search using “antiperspirant.”) Link established by Unilever, a UK antiperspirant manufacturer Comments