The FBI foiled a Muslim Brotherhood plot to take over the U.S.

Explanation: Although Al-Qaradawi is a well-known figure in the Arabic-speaking world, we found no evidence to support the claim that law enforcement, either federal or local, raided a home in Annandale, Virginia in relation to an imminent 30-year plan for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over the United States.

Uncategorized, fake news, islam, Islamophobia

In early June 2017, conspiracy-oriented web sites began posting stories accompanied by a YouTube video claiming that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had raided a house in Annandale, Virginia, and foiled a plot by the Muslim Brotherhood to take over the United States: The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic 30-year plan for taking over America from within was a closely-guarded secret until the FBI raided a house in Annandale, Virginia, where agents found a disturbing bundle of documents containing a blueprint for the Muslim takeover of our country. Now that the cat is out of the bag, we must do everything in our power to expose what’s going on, as startlingly, these American-hating vermin are in the final phase of their 5-step plan to destroy our country. Twenty-seven years ago, Muslim Brotherhood leader Yusuf al-Qaradwai traveled to America to organize Muslims across America, educating them with his diabolical plan for the compete Muslim takeover of America that would take 30 years to complete. It included a key tactic known as “Muruna,” where Muslims are able to violate Sharia Law in order to convince Americans that they are just like us. Just like an Ebola virus, Muruna is extremely effective, as Muslims are now able to seamlessly integrate into every facet of our society, as they make their way into our public school systems, our federal and law enforcement agencies, and key positions within our government. But due to the raid, their game is up. Now that their highly-guarded secrets are out, we as Americans must stand up and expose what’s going on, while doing everything in our power to stop their rapidly approaching plans from coming to fruition. We contacted the FBI about the alleged activity, but the bureau is unable confirm or deny ongoing investigations. However, Freedom Daily, along with the other sites that posted the story, are all known to regularly post misleading or false stories. Something as significant as an FBI raid to prevent a “takeover” of the United States would have been reported by trusted news outlets as well, if it were real. Yusuf al-Qaradwai is a Sunni cleric from Egypt who is a well-known in the Arabic-speaking world. He is a controversial figure. Writing for The National in 2014, a news outlet in the United Arab Emirates, journalist Hassan Hassan noted: Perhaps the most dangerous of such fatwas are those issued by influential clerics such as Yusuf Al Qaradawi, one of the Muslim world’s most prominent theologians. Sheikh Al Qaradawi, an Egyptian who heads the International Union of Muslim Scholars, has a rich legacy of advocating for the integration of Muslims into the modern world. He fought against extremist views and wrote several books addressing troubling trends in Muslim societies. Recently, however, he has dedicated most of his public appearances to making political and religious statements that threaten to entrench radicalism within Muslim societies in the region and beyond. As a result, commentators in sections of the Arabic media started discussing a key part of the cleric’s legacy, namely issuing fatwas that sanction violence and stoke sectarian and religious hatred. Commentators have called on the cleric to consider the impact of his fatwas on the dozens of civilians across the region dying in suicide bombings that occur almost weekly. In one of his best-known fatwas, issued in the 1990s, Sheikh Al Qaradawi permitted the use of suicide bombing as a defensive tactic against Israel. Since then, instead of retracting the fatwa, he has repeatedly responded by saying that he was not the only cleric to justify suicide operations and that his fatwa was tailored specifically for helpless Palestinians in their fight against the Israeli occupation.


U.S. Representatives Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar co-sponsored legislation to recognize Muslim holidays as federal holidays.

Explanation: “So please, sit back, enjoy our show, and don’t forget; this is parody and nothing but bullshit.”

Junk News, ilhan omar, rashida tlaib, so right it hurts

When Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) took their oaths of office on 3 January 2019, they became the first Muslim women to be sworn in as members of Congress. A week-and-a-half later, on 12 January, an article appeared on a website called “So Right It Hurts” alleging that Tlaib and Omar had already co-sponsored legislation adding two Islamic observances, Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, to the roster of federally recognized holidays and were laying plans to add even more: Freshman Congressmen Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib have wasted no time in shaking up the US House of Representatives. Early Friday morning, Omar and Tlaib introduced a bill adding Islamic holidays to the Federal calendar which has traditionally only recognized American holidays. Omar and Tlaib’s bill would add Eid Al-Fitr at the end of Ramadan and the four-day-long celebration of Eid Al-Adha to the list of Federally recognized holidays, potentially granting reasons to banks, schools, and other businesses to remain closed for five additional days per year. Omar and Tlaib justified their work as making America more inclusive of it’s Muslim-American population and moving us further away from our history as a primarily Christian nation. The women are also considering a last minute addition to their bill that would allow for regular Salah time breaks for school children and workers as well as a designated area in each public business where Muslims could perform Salah, the five daily prayers plus the Friday prayer, unmolested. However, as of mid-January 2019, neither Tlaib nor Omar was shown on the website of the U.S. Congress as having sponsored (or co-sponsored) any legislation at all, much less legislation pertaining to Islamic affairs. It seems unlikely, moreover, that the first legislative endeavor of any fledgling representative would be trying to create new federal holidays. The last time Congress passed a bill designating a new federal holiday was in 1983 when Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birthday received formal recognition. No president since Ronald Reagan has signed such a bill. In point of fact, the story was fabricated from start to finish. A disclaimer on the So Right It Hurts website describes its content as “paradoxical,” and “for parody purposes only”: “All information on the Site and our mobile app are paradoxical, that is a ‘literary work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule.’ These articles range from misleading to wildly imaginative and are provided in good faith the reader understands that, however, we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information on the Site or our mobile application.” A notice on the site’s “About Us” page phrases it even more succinctly:


In January 2019, Second Lady Karen Pence began working as a teacher at a school that bans LGBT teachers and students.

Explanation: What's true: Immanuel Christian School requires would-be employees to affirm in writing that they will not engage in homosexual sexual acts or have a transgender identity. It also reserves the right to refuse to admit or to expel students if those students or their parents support, condone, promote or engage in homosexual sexual acts, a rule that could reasonably be interpreted as banning openly lesbian, gay or bisexual parents or students. What's false: The school does not explicitly bar gay, lesbian or bisexual persons from teaching there, but rather states that homosexual sexual acts (as opposed to same-sex preferences) are considered unacceptable "moral misconduct." What's undetermined: It is a matter of subjective personal opinion, rather than objective fact, whether the ban on teachers' engaging in homosexual sexual acts is tantamount to a de facto ban on gay, lesbian and bisexual teachers.

Politics, christian conservatism, christianity, education

In January 2019, Second Lady Karen Pence faced widespread criticism after the White House announced she had taken a job as a part-time art teacher at a Christian school in Northern Virginia, an institution that, according to some news reports, bars LGBT teachers, staff and students. A White House press release announced that Pence — wife of Vice President Mike Pence — had returned to the K-8 elementary school where she worked from 2001 to 2013 while her husband was a U.S. Representative for the 2nd and 6th Congressional Districts of Indiana: “Today, Karen Pence is back in the classroom, not as the Second Lady of the United States, but as Mrs. Pence to teach art classes for children at an elementary school in Northern Virginia. Mrs. Pence will teach twice a week at Immanuel Christian School until May. Mrs. Pence accepted this wonderful opportunity to teach art in early December 2018. ‘I am excited to be back in the classroom and doing what I love to do, which is to teach art to elementary students,’ said Mrs. Pence. ‘I have missed teaching art, and it’s great to return to the school where I taught art for twelve years.”’ The announcement quickly received negative press due to requirements that Immanuel Christian School places on would-be employees and parents of would-be students. The Huffington Post published an article with the headline “Karen Pence is Working at a School That Bans LGBTQ Employees and Kids.” The article read: “Karen Pence, wife of Vice President Mike Pence, started at a job this week teaching art at Immanuel Christian School in Northern Virginia. It’s not a school where everyone is welcome. In a “parent agreement” posted online, the school says it will refuse admission to students who participate in or condone homosexual activity, HuffPost learned through an investigation into discriminatory admissions policies. The 2018 employment application also makes candidates sign a pledge not to engage in homosexual activity or violate the ‘unique roles of male and female. '”  The New York Times‘ headline was “Karen Pence Is Teaching at Christian School That Bars L.G.B.T. Students and Teachers,” an ABC News report carried the headline “Second lady Karen Pence to teach at school with ban against LGBT students, parents and teachers,” Yahoo! News reported “Karen Pence works at school that bans homosexuality” and CNN reported that the school “bans gay students and parents.” Salon.com and the Daily Beast published similar articles, which also averred that the school barred LGBT employees and students. At the heart of these claims were two documents posted on the website of the school, which is in Springfield, Virginia, about 12 miles southwest of downtown Washington, D.C. and is closely affiliated with Immanuel Bible Church. The first document is the employment application required of anyone applying for a job as a teacher, teaching assistant or substitute teacher at the school. As part of that application, would-be staff are required to sign and initial each of 13 “articles of employment.” The document prefaces those articles with the following introduction:  “Immanuel Christian School is a non-profit religious educational organization and is supported as a ministry of Immanuel Bible Church. More importantly, our school is a community of believers who have joined together to meet the spiritual and academic needs of our community, representing Jesus Christ. Our school promotes behavior consistent with the Holy Scriptures. Consequently, when joining Immanuel Christian School, you freely and willingly agree to the standards of behavior outlined in this policy. The standards included in the policy are not exhaustive; rather, they provide a guideline of conduct we believe is in accordance with biblical standards. Please read, initial each item, and sign as indicated.” Would-be teachers are required to affirm that they are born-again Christians, that they are or will become active members of a local “theologically conservative” church, that they will avoid “careless speech and actions” (for example in social media postings) and that they will in general act in a way that upholds and promotes the conservative, Christian, biblically founded mission and values of the school. Article 8 goes into specific details about behaviors that are not permitted of would-be employees, and outlines examples of what school authorities regard as prohibited “moral misconduct.” This is the section of the employment application that caused widespread controversy in January 2019: I will strive to live a personal life of moral purity that is separated from the world according to Scriptures, as defined by the Statement of Faith of Immanuel Bible Church and agreed upon by the Elders and Pastors of Immanuel Bible Church. I understand that the term “marriage” has only one meaning; the uniting of one man and one woman in a single, exclusive covenant union as delineated in Scripture and that God intends sexual intimacy to occur only between a man and a woman who are married to each other and that God has commanded that no intimate sexual activity is engaged in outside of marriage between a man and a woman. Further, I will maintain a lifestyle based on biblical standards of moral conduct. Moral misconduct which violates the bona fide occupational qualifications for employees includes, but is not limited to, such behaviors as the following: heterosexual activity outside of marriage (e.g., premarital sex, cohabitation, extramarital sex), homosexual or lesbian sexual activity, polygamy, transgender identity, any other violation of the unique roles of male and female, sexual harassment, use or viewing of pornographic material or websites, and sexual abuse or improprieties toward minors as defined by Scripture and federal or state law. So in order to be considered as a potential employee of Immanuel Christian School, an applicant must sign a personal commitment not to engage in homosexual sexual activity, “transgender identity” or “any other violation of the unique roles of male and female.” The document does not explicitly prohibit teachers from being gay, lesbian or bisexual (or prohibit individuals who are gay, lesbian or bisexual from teaching at the school) as such, but rather it prohibits them from engaging in homosexual sexual activity. This appears to be in keeping with a widespread position, common to many Christian denominations, that persons with same-sex sexual preferences ought not to be condemned or excluded on the basis of those preferences alone, but only on the condition that they strictly exercise chastity, and refrain from publicly identifying as gay, lesbian or bisexual or engaging in same-sex and extra-marital relationships or sexual activity. It is a point of considerable philosophical dispute — and beyond the scope of a fact check — whether barring gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals from giving full expression to their sexual identities and orientations while being members of a church, for example, or teaching at a school, is itself tantamount to effectively barring gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals from those organizations. For example, Dignity USA, a group that advocates inclusion and participation for LGBTQI Catholics, defines its viewpoint in the following way: We believe that gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex Catholics in our diversity are members of Christ’s mystical body, numbered among the People of God. We have an inherent dignity because God created us, Christ died for us, and the Holy Spirit sanctified us in Baptism, making us temples of the Spirit, and channels through which God’s love becomes visible. Because of this, it is our right, our privilege, and our duty to live the sacramental life of the Church, so that we might become more powerful instruments of God’s love working among all people. We believe that gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex persons can express their sexuality and gender identities and expressions in a manner that is consonant with Christ’s teaching. We believe that we can express our sexuality physically, in a unitive manner that is loving, life-giving, and life-affirming. We believe that all sexuality should be exercised in an ethically responsible and unselfish way. We believe that our transgender and queer communities can express their core identities in a sincere, affirming and authentic manner. By contrast, the official position of the Catholic church (as articulated in the Catechism) is that homosexual sexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to the natural law” but that homosexual persons “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity” on the condition that they exercise chastity. Article 8 in Immanuel Christian School’s articles of employment does specifically and explicitly designate “transgender identity” as a form of unacceptable moral misconduct. Unlike the ambiguity of the document’s position towards homosexual persons (as opposed to homosexual sexual acts), this clearly amounts to a ban on transgender persons from working at the school as teachers, substitute teachers or teaching assistants. The second document at the heart of the January 2019 controversy over Karen Pence’s employment at the school was a “parent agreement,” which parents of would-be students are required to “support” as part of the application process for being admitted to the school. It’s not clear whether parents are required to sign the agreement before their child can be accepted for enrollment at the school, but the document prefaces the list of 15 commitments with the following statement: “I agree that Immanuel Christian School should maintain its objective of thoroughly Christian education and should show evidence of that in policies for academic work, student behavior, and all relationships with students, employees, school families, churches, and the community. I will cooperate with Immanuel Christian School (ICS) in the following ways.” The sixth of these commitments reads as follows: I understand the biblical role of Immanuel Christian School is to partner with families to encourage students to be imitators of Christ. This necessarily involves the school’s understanding and belief regarding biblical morality and standards of conduct. I understand that the school reserves the right, within its sole discretion, to refuse admission to an applicant or to discontinue enrollment of a student if the atmosphere or conduct within a particular home, the activities of a parent or guardian, or the activities of the student are counter to, or are in opposition to, the biblical lifestyle the school teaches. This includes, but is not limited to contumacious behavior, divisive conduct, and participating in, supporting, or condoning sexual immorality, homosexual activity or bi-sexual activity, promoting such practices, or being unable to support the moral principles of the school. (Lev. 20:13 and Romans 1:27.) I acknowledge the importance of a family culture based on biblical principles and embrace biblical family values such as a healthy marriage between one man and one woman. My role as spiritual mentor to my children will be taken seriously. So the school reserves the right to refuse to admit or to expel a student if either that student or their parents or guardians engage in, support, condone or promote homosexual or bisexual activity. Although this does not explicitly bar gay, lesbian or bisexual persons from attending the school or sending their children there, it could reasonably be regarded as an implicit ban on openly gay, lesbian or bisexual persons doing so. It is extremely difficult to imagine a scenario in which openly gay, lesbian or bisexual parents could, in good faith, present themselves to school authorities as upholding a requirement that they not support, condone, or promote homosexual or bisexual activity, especially if that activity is not regarded as limited to sexual acts, but rather includes same-sex relationships. Similarly, it is extremely difficult to imagine a scenario in which the parents of children who have openly expressed their own emerging or settled homosexual or bisexual orientation could, in good faith, present their children for attendance at the school while also committing to not support or condone homosexual or bisexual “activity.”   Significantly, the document cites Chapter 20, Verse 13 of the book of Leviticus as the scriptural basis for its ban on the promotion or support of homosexual acts by parents or students. That verse famously reads: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” We asked the White House whether Karen Pence had signed and initialed all 13 of the “articles of employment” for Immanuel Christian School, including Article 8, and whether she regarded that document, along with the “parent agreement,” as amounting to a formal or de facto ban on LGBT staff, parents and students. We did not receive a response in time for publication. Similarly, we asked Immanuel Christian School whether the provisions of Article 8 in the articles of employment, taken together with the parent agreement, were intended to be a formal or de facto ban on LGBT staff, parents and students, but we did not receive a response in time for publication.


Russian president Vladimir Putin slammed Western countries for using GMOs and vaccines that slow evolution.

Explanation: In May 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a report saying there was no proof that genetically-engineered food is linked to health or environmental harm. As of 2015, the Russian government had blocked the growing of GMO crops domestically and had restricted GMO-based imports, but we couldn’t find any statements made by Putin revealing his personal views on the subject.

In January 2016, dubious web sites began posting articles quoting a statement attributed to Russian president Vladimir Putin that castigated the West for slowing human evolution with vaccines and genetically-modified foods (GMOs), words supposedly taken from a report circulated by the Security Council of the Russian Federation (SCRF). The statement attributed to Putin claimed Western governments were subjugating their citizens with GMOs and vaccines, and Russia must “fight” that process: We as a species have the choice to continue to develop our bodies and brains in a healthy upward trajectory, or we can follow the Western example of recent decades and intentionally poison our population with genetically altered food, pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, and fast food that should be classified as a dangerous, addictive drug.” We must fight this. A physically and intellectually disabled population is not in our interests. The alleged Putin statement described the average Westerner as an “intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown.” None of the articles cited or linked to the source of the Putin statement or the original report from which it was supposedly taken. The earliest instance of this item we could find was published on 9 January 2016 by a web site that pushes anti-vaccine propaganda and conspiracy theories (sample headline: “7 Reasons Why ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ May Actually Be ‘Indigo People’”), and since then it has been shared widely by other dubious, anti-science web sites such as Natural News. The rest of the story indicates the piece is little more than pro-Russian propaganda intended to appeal to Americans who subscribe to anti-scientific views about vaccines and foods and claims Russia is a major backer of organic farming: Russia under President Putin has been giving away land for free in the past few years to people willing to farm organically and sustainably. The goal is to become the world’s “leading exporter” of non-GMO foods that are based on “ecologically clean” production. Russia did give away land in its sparsely-populated far eastern region that borders China, but not specifically for organic farming. The giveaway was instead an effort to spur development in the region, according to the Global Post: President Vladimir Putin signed a law this month granting 2.5 acres of land to any Russian citizen who wants it. If they can prove they’ve done something with it after five years, primarily by agricultural means, it’s all theirs. Officials hope the program will rejuvenate a region that researchers estimate has lost nearly 2 million people since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. “It will allow Russians, especially the youth, to discover in the Far East a real chance for self-realization,” said Aleksandr Galushka, the minister for Far East development. Despite occupying roughly one-third of Russia, the Far East — with its vast forests, forbidding tundra and spectacular volcanoes — is now home to only 4 percent of its population. President Putin doesn’t seem to hold an anti-vaccine stance. In early 2016, the Russian government was boasting that the country’s scientists were developing vaccines for the Zika and Ebola viruses.


Donald Trump Jr. tweeted, "Do you know what's deplorable? Being impeached!" to the Clintons in September 2016.

Explanation: ‘Do You Know What’s Deplorable? Being Impeached’ Tweet

On December 18 2019, United States President Donald Trump was impeached on two counts by the House of Representatives; that night and the following day, screenshots and quotations of a tweet purportedly from his son Donald Trump Jr. to then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill Clinton circulated in the aftermath:Screenshots of the tweet placed its date in September 2016. That month, Clinton had made remarks in which she described some of Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables”:We’re going to put comprehensive quality affordable health care within reach for more people, including for mental health and addiction. We’re gonna take on youth homelessness, and as my wonderful, extraordinary, great daughter said, we are going to end the cruel and dangerous practice of conversion therapy. We’re going to keep working toward an AIDS-free generation, a goal that I set as secretary of state, and with your help we’re going to pass comprehensive gun laws…I know there are only 60 days left to make our case — and don’t get complacent, don’t see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think well he’s done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?Clinton’s husband, former United States President Bill Clinton, was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1998:In January 1998, news broke that President Clinton had engaged in an affair with a White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. This story was political dynamite, not just because it was a sex scandal, but also because it had dire legal implications … To many observers, impeachment or resignation seemed to be the only resolution.Clinton’s scandal dominated political news in 1998. Late that year, the House voted to impeach him:On August 17, 1998, following his testimony before a federal grand jury on the matter, Clinton acknowledged in a televised address to the nation his “inappropriate” conduct with Lewinsky and admitted that he had misled the nation and embarrassed his family. But he did not admit to having lied, having instructed anyone else to lie, or orchestrating a cover-up involving anyone else.Starr then sent his report to the House of Representatives alleging that there were grounds for impeaching Clinton for lying under oath, obstruction of justice, abuse of powers, and other offenses. After a vitriolic series of televised House hearings and the release of thousands of documents — many in graphic detail — the House Judiciary Committee, on a strictly partisan vote, recommended that an impeachment inquiry commence. The House adopted two articles of impeachment, charging the President with perjury in his grand jury testimony and obstructing justice in his dealings with various potential witnesses.However, the Senate did not have a two-thirds majority, and Clinton was not removed from office.As for Donald Trump Jr.’s “You know what’s deplorable? Being Impeached!! !” tweet, it was both genuine and still on his timeline as of December 2019. Trump Jr. sent the tweet on September 10 2019, not long after Hillary Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” comment became viral news:Dear Clintons,You know what's deplorable?Being Impeached!! !#BasketOfDeplorables— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 10, 2016


New drugs show rare promise against advanced breast cancer.

Explanation: Doctors on Wednesday reported unusually good results from tests of two experimental drugs in women with an aggressive form of breast cancer that had spread widely and resisted many previous treatments.

AP Top News, Cancer, Health, General News, Breast cancer, San Antonio, Business, Chemotherapy, U.S. News, Tumors

One drug showed particular ability to reach tumors in the brain, which are notoriously tough to treat. The other pairs a sort of homing device for cancer cells with a payload of chemotherapy that’s released when it reaches its target. “It’s a guided missile. It’s able to bring the chemotherapy directly to the cancer cell,” said the study leader, Dr. Ian Krop of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Results were disclosed at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and in the New England Journal of Medicine. From 15% to 20% of breast cancers are “HER2-positive” — they have too much of a protein called HER2 on their cell surfaces, driven by an overactive gene that promotes cancer growth. Krop led a study of 253 such women to test the guided missile drug, called T-DXd, given as an infusion every three weeks. These women had tried on average six previous treatments before the experimental drug. Different doses were tested, and 184 women got what turned out to be the best one. Among those women, 61% saw their tumors shrink at least 30%. In 6% of them, no signs of cancer were seen in at least two followup scans. Although the experimental drug was not tested against others, the response rate is three to four times better than what’s usually seen in this situation, Krop said. The median time until cancer worsened was 16 months, and to see anything hold such serious cancers at bay for more than a year is exciting, he said. Side effects were substantial, though. About 60% of women had low blood counts, nausea, anemia or fatigue, and 15% stopped treatment because of them. Most serious: Twenty-five developed lung inflammation, and four died of it. This is a rare side effect with other drugs for this type of cancer, but it was much more common with the experimental drug. Doctors can watch patients closely and give anti-inflammatory medicines if it occurs, Krop said. Because these cancers generally prove fatal, the drug “is still beneficial for most patients,” he said. An independent expert, Dr. Jennifer Litton of the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said it may be possible to give patients preventative anti-inflammatory medicines. It’s worth the risk because the drug’s benefit is so great, she said. The study was sponsored by the drug’s developers, Daiichi Sankyo Inc. and AstraZeneca, and they are seeking approval for the medicine in the U.S., Japan and Europe. Krop consults for the companies. Dana-Farber’s Dr. Eric Winer helped lead a study of the other experimental medicine — tucatinib, from Seattle Genetics. “It’s a drug that’s particularly able to get into the brain,” he said, and half of the 612 participants had cancer that had spread there. “These patients had nothing” that worked, and they’re often excluded from tests of new drugs because their outlook is so poor, Litton said. All were given usual treatments — Herceptin and the chemo drug Xeloda — plus tucatinib or dummy pills. After two years, 45% of those on tucatinib were alive versus 27% of the others. Among the women whose cancer had spread to the brain, one quarter were alive with no worsening of those tumors a year later. None of the women in the comparison group achieved that. Diarrhea, fatigue, nausea and some liver side effects were a little more common with tucatinib. About 6% of the tucatinib group stopped treatment because of side effects versus 3% of the others. Litton said she put some patients on studies of the drug “and they did really well.”  Seattle Genetics sponsored the study and Winer and others consult for the company. ___ Marilynn Marchione can be followed on Twitter at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.


Explanation: The House of Representatives dealt a blow to childhood obesity warriors on Thursday by passing a bill that abandons proposals that threatened to end the reign of pizza and French fries on federally funded school lunch menus.

A Numero Uno pizza is served at Pizzeria Uno in Chicago January 20, 2010. REUTERS/John Gress The scuttled changes, which would have stripped pizza’s status as a vegetable and limited how often French fries could be served, stemmed from a 2010 child nutrition law calling on schools to improve the nutritional quality of lunches served to almost 32 million U.S. school children. The action is a win for the makers of frozen French fries and pizza and comes just weeks after the deep-pocketed food, beverage and restaurant industries successfully weakened government proposals for voluntary food marketing guidelines to children. “It’s an important victory,” said Corey Henry, spokesman for the American Frozen Food Institute (AFFI). That trade association lobbied Congress on behalf of frozen pizza sellers like ConAgra Foods Inc and Schwan Food Co and French   fry makers McCain Foods Ltd and J.R. Simplot Co, the latter best known as a supplier to fast-food company McDonald’s Corp.   “Our concern is that the standards would force companies in many respects to change their products in a way that would make them unpalatable to students,” Henry said. Other AFFI members include H.J. Heinz Co, General Mills Inc and Kraft Foods Inc. The school lunch provisions were a small part of a mammoth bill that provides money for all parts of the federal government. The House sent the bill to the Senate for final Congressional approval. “They started out with French fries and now they have moved on to pizza,” said Jared Polis, Colorado Democrat, who lamented the government’s subsidy of unhealthy diets through school meals. “Pizza alone (without side dishes) ... common sense, it’s not a vegetable.”   Calls to Minnesota-based Schwan and its external public relations firm and ConAgra were not returned. Mark Dunn, AFFI’s chairman and J.R. Simplot’s main lobbyist, referred requests for comment to a company spokesman, who declined to respond. Polis mentioned French fries in reference to a provision in the bill that would have blocked the government from limiting servings of white potatoes to one cup per week in meals served through the roughly $18 billion U.S. school meals program overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. In addition to potatoes, USDA also proposed limits on starchy vegetables including corn, green peas and lima beans, while requiring lunches to serve a wider variety of fruit and vegetables. Another provision bars the USDA from changing the way it credits tomato paste, used in pizza. The change would have required pizza to have at least a half-cup of tomato paste to qualify as a vegetable serving. Current rules, which likely will remain in place, require just two tablespoons of tomato paste. According to a USDA report from November 2007, pizza and French fries were among the most commonly consumed lunch foods by participants in the national school lunch program. Sam Farr of California, the Democratic leader on the appropriations subcommittee in charge of the USDA, said the interference with USDA rule-writing was “wrong” and “shouldn’t be done”. Still, Farr supported passage of the overall bill. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said on Wednesday that U.S. school children would still see more fruit and vegetables, more grains, more low-fat milk and less salt and fat in meals despite the language in the spending bill. “First of all, we can assure parents of school-age children (that) USDA will do everything it can” to improve the nutritional quality of school meals, as required by the 2010 child nutrition law. Vilsack was speaking via teleconference from Hanoi during a U.S. trade trip. Healthier school lunches are a cornerstone of First Lady Michelle Obama’s campaign to end childhood obesity. Nearly one in three children in America is overweight or obese and the numbers are growing. “Clearly more pizza and French fries in schools is not good for kids, but it’s good for companies that make pizza and French fries,” said Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer group that advocates better food and nutrition policies. Wootan said U.S. food makers trumpet products they say are healthy while at the same time lobbying against regulations aimed at improving the nutritional quality of their products. “A year ago, I was walking the halls of Congress arm-in-arm with the food industry, fighting for healthier school lunches,” Wootan said. “Today, we are on opposite sides, and I’m battling to keep them from weakening school nutrition standards and school marketing guidelines and other provisions.”


Penn study: Pay patients to take their pills

Explanation: Researchers studied about 1,500 patients with blood cholesterol levels that put them at risk for heart disease and stroke to try to encourage them (via cash) to take their medicines – statins. Results were mixed, but the doctor-and-patient pairs who both received cash rewards showed the best results in lowering cholesterol levels. This story does an excellent job of explaining the study, providing great context on the underlying problems related to medication adherence, and quoting experts not involved in the study This is a lucid and well-rounded article on a very interesting topic. Solving behavioral issues that prevent patients from taking their medications is an important challenge. Even in this study, even with rewards, fewer than half the patients treated for high cholesterol levels kept taking their medication as prescribed. Many of the established Good Ideas in medicine (medications, etc) are stymied by downstream hurdles — doctors don’t prescribe the treatment as often as they should, patients don’t follow through, etc. Statins are a great example. It is really important to examine these gaps and design clever, cost-effective ways to close them.

The story discusses costs in a very interesting way – because the point of the research was modifying human behavior by paying “rewards” of cash to patients and sometimes doctors. What we didn’t find in the story is the “cost” of manpower to run a program like this. How much would it cost (besides the actual cost of $1,204 per patient-doctor pair) to administer this? How practical is it? We applaud the writer for including this paragraph – giving the real context that matters most. Italics added by editor. “Still to come is an analysis of whether the amounts paid in the study – up to $1,024 over the course of a year – would be worth it, in terms of avoiding the costs of treating a certain number of heart attacks and strokes.” Overall, the story does an excellent job of addressing the cost trade-offs. There were four patient groups. The story does a great job of describing the precise benefits, in terms of blood cholesterol, that each patient group showed (if any). The group that benefited the most was the one where both patients and doctors received incentives. That group showed a drop of 33.6 points in LDL cholesterol, compared to a 25.1 drop in the group that received no money. It may have been useful to include a sense of how that reduction might translate into reduced risk of a heart attack (one could use the risk calculator the story mentions to calculate an estimate, or ask one of the sources to help with this). But while quantifying the drops in cholesterol is important, we also wanted to know whether the incentives actually translated to increased compliance with the medication regimen. Other factors beyond the medication usage (diet, genetics, etc.) may have impacted participants’ cholesterol levels, so it would be interesting to know if the cholesterol results were confirmed by the medication adherence findings. The story does a nice job describing some of the subtle downsides associated with the pay-for-taking-meds approach as well as the side effects of the meds themselves. All four groups in the study, even those who did not receive any payment, were issued electronic pill bottles. As one commenter said “they might have felt they were being watched.” The bottles sent a signal of some sort when opened, so that researchers would know who opened the top. Another commenter pointed out that if money as incentive works for a short-term, how do we know patients would continue past the payment stage? These limitations are part of why one outside commenter described the results as “a nice first step.” The story makes clear the methods and comparison in the randomized controlled study, and the quality of evidence. It includes important elements like study size and study design, and it touches on some limitations. There is no disease mongering. The story goes beyond just “satisfactory.” Extra stars for including a patient (who was not involved) who is an advocate in this area, as well as researchers not involved in the study. The piece does a great job on this. The alternatives in this case would be other ways to motivate patients to take statins, and we think the story does this well. The story makes clear that paying cash to patients to take medicine is an experimental idea, not something that your local doctor is likely to offer. But with that said, it might have been helpful to ask one of the sources about how widespread this approach is and in what contexts it is being used (there are examples around the country). The story accurately suggests that’s what’s novel here is paying both patients and physicians to improve compliance. The story could have been clearer about the fact that there are a number of other studies looking at patient financial incentives. The story mentions one example (related to smoking) in the introduction, but it could have gone further. The story does not rely on a news release, but is a fine example of where extra reporting can provide context.


Ken Paxton Says Barack Obama "acknowledged over 20 times" that his administration’s Deferred Action for Parents of Americans "immigration edict was a violation of law and the separation of powers.

Explanation: Nine-time Olympic gold medalist Usain Bolt is bringing his electric scooters to Japan, hopeful that his celebrity status will help persuade regulators that the environmental benefits are important enough to relax some of the curbs on their use.

Under current laws, scooters can only be driven on roads, they need to carry license plates, and riders require a motorcycle license. The world-record sprinter and co-founder of Bolt Mobility announced the launch at an event in a Tokyo restaurant on Friday. The initial goal is to limit its scooter rentals to private land, which is exempted from the traffic regulations, and to be operating on 40 university campuses by the end of 2020. Beyond that, representatives of the year-old American start-up are talking with regulators about easing restrictions, arguing its scooters can reduce traffic congestion and thereby reduce emissions. Bolt hopes his celebrity can help deliver that message. “We’re still talking and trying to figure out how to push forward and do better things for the environment, because that’s where it started,” he said in an interview with Reuters following the event. “This is the future.”   Bolt Mobility aims to be in 20 cities globally by the end of this year and 50 across eight countries in 2020. Earlier this year, it launched in New York, Paris and Washington. E-scooter sharing has become a popular option for so-called “last-mile” commutes in many urban centers worldwide, but they have also created problems. In San Francisco, customers have abandoned the vehicles on public walkways, spurring the city attorney to call them a “public nuisance.”   Paris has tightened rules on where scooters can be ridden following two deaths and scores of injuries. An elderly cyclist died after colliding with an e-scooter in Singapore in September. In Tokyo, e-scooters are still a rarity, and under current laws are treated as low-powered motorcycles. However there is growing momentum for making them more mainstream. At the Tokyo Motor Show this month, hosted by the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, visitors could try out electric scooters built by Japanese and foreign startups. The world’s largest e-scooter company, Lime, joined the Japanese lobby group Microbility Promotion Council on Thursday. However a change in regulation may take some time, despite the backing of some Japanese government officials. “Even though everyone says it’s very convenient, safety has to be the top priority,” an official at Japan’s transport ministry said, declining to be named because he was not authorized to talk to the media. “That’s going to be an extremely high hurdle.”


Big Island hospital struck by outbreak of scabies.

Explanation: An outbreak of scabies has been confirmed at a Big Island hospital, affecting a number of employees, officials said.

Kailua-Kona, Health, Hawaii, Scabies, Disease outbreaks

The outbreak of the contagious skin disease caused by parasitic mites was officially identified at the Kona Community Hospital last week, hospital officials said. The hospital has not said how many people have been infected, but officials said more cases are likely to appear. Scabies is caused by mites that burrow under the skin and lay eggs, leading to intense itching, according to the state Disease Outbreak Control Division. Symptoms can take about two to four weeks to appear after infection. It can cause a pimple-like rash to form. It spreads from skin-to-skin contact or contact with mite-covered items. Scabies can be treated by medicated skin cream or lotion followed by a hot bath, according to the division. Lisa Downing, the hospital’s director of Infection Prevention and Employee Health, told West Hawaii Today that the outbreak was found after an “overabundance of people” reported similar symptoms. The hospital removes employees with active cases, keeping them out of the facility for 24 hours after treatment. Downing wouldn’t say how many employees were infected by scabies, but she said a department in the hospital had staffing issues for a time last week. “We had a little bit of a staffing issue in one of these departments, and it was actually handled very well,” Downing said. “So at no time did we have lack of staff or lack of qualified staff to take care of our patients, but we were a little strained in that one particular area.” She didn’t name the department. The hospital’s procedures and protocols for infectious outbreaks have been implemented. “Our people do a really good job of following our protocols here,” Downing said. “Nothing like this has ever happened before, and I can pretty much guarantee you that everyone is going to be hyper vigilant from this point forward.”


Tuberculosis infection found at University of Mississippi.

Explanation: Mississippi’s state Health Department says it has diagnosed a student at the University of Mississippi with tuberculosis.

Mississippi, Health, University of Mississippi, Tuberculosis, Oxford

Health officials say they’re trying to identify other students on the Oxford campus who may be exposed to infection and plan to test about 500 people for tuberculosis. People who are going to be tested will get a letter, and the state says a second round of testing may be necessary. People who are infected will be treated to prevent tuberculosis from developing, but people who haven’t developed the disease aren’t contagious. State Epidemiologist Dr. Paul Byers says tuberculosis investigations at schools and universities are sometimes necessary. Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Brandi Hephner LaBanc says the university is working closely with state health officials.


The Affordable Care Act says that "at age 76 when you most need it most, you are not eligible for cancer treatment. …  Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.

A reader recently sent us a years-old chain email that has morphed into something more timely. It now has the heading, "IMPORTANT ACTION INFORMATION FOR NOVEMBER, 2014  VOTE." For years before that, though, the chain email has floated around the Internet, making the scary claim that "at age 76 when you most need it most, you are not eligible for cancer treatment. Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age." PolitiFact Oregon gave this a rating of  when they looked at it in 2013. The email -- which has changed somewhat as it has zigzagged around social media -- can be identified by its attribution of the information to Judge David Kithil of Marble Falls, Texas. (More on him later.) It opens with a dire warning: "MEDICARE AT AGE 76, IMPORTANT PLEASE READ - ANYONE WHO DOUBTS THIS IS TRUE CAN DOWNLOAD THE NEW OBAMA CARE AND LOOK UP THE PAGES MENTIONED. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING......THIS should be read by everyone, especially important to those over 75..... If you are younger, then it may apply to your parents…." However, the email is hardly up-to-date -- it’s been circulating since 2009 and apparently stems from a list of tweets by blogger Peter Fleckenstein about H.R. 3200. That was an early version of the legislation that later became the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. Many aspects of that original bill never made it into law, and other provisions have been misinterpreted or exaggerated by the email’s author. In fact, our friends at FactCheck.org found that just four of the email’s 48 claims were accurate. Here, we'll recap what we know about the cancer claim and a few of the email's other points. The cancer claim The email bases its claim about the age-based rationing of cancer care on page 272 of H.R. 3200, section 1145. But the claim is not correct. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law in March 2010. It does not include rationing for cancer treatment based on age or any other demographic factor. Nor did the precursor bill, H.R. 3200, include a cut-off age for cancer treatments. One provision of H.R. 3200 did include a section on "treatment of certain cancer hospitals," but this simply allowed Medicare -- the federally run health plan for those older than 65 -- to allocate more funding to cancer hospitals if they incurred higher costs. The American Nurses Association called this the "opposite of rationing." Under current legislation, "all medically necessary treatment is covered by Medicare. Including cancer treatments, regardless of age," said Katherine Fitzpatrick of the Medicare Rights Center, an advocacy group, in a June 2013 interview. The Medicare Rights Center and AARP, the largest national organization of seniors, agree that hospital admittance has to do with billing under parts A or B of Medicare. Under the version of the Affordable Care Act that was adopted, Medicare payments to hospitals can be reduced if patients are readmitted within 30 days for certain conditions, such as pneumonia, but that’s not what the email claims. Meanwhile, the email raises a legitimate concern -- "rationing" -- but does so in a misleading way. "Everyone hates the word ‘rationing,’ " Harvard University health-policy specialist Katherine Baicker told PolitiFact in 2009. But rationing is not something that suddenly appeared in the Affordable Care Act, she added. "From an economics perspective, there's no way around rationing. Some care is being rationed now. Everyone isn't getting everything." It’s theoretically possible to spend an unlimited amount on health care, but as a society, we only have a limited amount of public resources -- so tough decisions have to be made on how to allocate those resources. Before the Affordable Care Act was passed, "rationing" occurred when private insurers denied coverage for those with pre-existing conditions, or denied reimbursement for certain basic services, or priced their plans too high for certain consumers to pay. If anything, John F. Holahan, a fellow at the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center, said in an earlier interview that private insurers are historically more likely to deny health services than Medicare is. "That's the argument you hear people making," he said. "But I think they have it backwards." A final word. Remember Judge Kithil, the supposed author of the email? He’s disowned it. "I wish it would die. I can’t control it," David Kithil told PolitiFact Oregon in 2013. "I don’t know how something like that goes viral." The former judge recalled that he wrote a letter to his local newspaper in 2009, protesting the initial version of the health care act. The letter was published in the River Cities Daily Tribune, circulation 5,000. Somehow, he said, it was republished online. Kithil said he wants readers to disregard his letter, since it is outdated and based on legislation that did not become law. "I’ve had calls from all over the country -- 300 to 400 calls over three or four years on this," he said at the time. He said he pleads with the callers, "Don’t pass it on. It’s not accurate anymore. Trash it." Our ruling The chain email says that the Affordable Care Act requires that, "at age 76 when you most need it most, you are not eligible for cancer treatment. … Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age." With this email, longevity has not meant accuracy: Seniors do not need to worry about their cancer care being yanked away once they reach age 76. The claims are based on an incorrect understanding of a bill that never passed. The Affordable Care Act does not include any sections on seniors losing their treatment eligibility once they reach age 76.


‘Critical moment’ for firms amid retirements, opioid crisis.

Explanation: For the first time since the recession hit a decade ago, the demand for workers is steady.

Health, Baby Boomers, Generations, Johnstown

But leaders with many of the companies trying to fill those posts statewide - in areas such as manufacturing, health care and transportation - say they are stymied by a lack of workers ready, willing or able to do the work. A decades-long education message that economic development leaders say stigmatized the trades, and an opioid crisis draining America’s “prime” pool of 25- to 54 year-old workers, have fueled the troubling trend - a situation further complicated by the fact that a generation of baby boomers is now retiring. State officials predict that the hiring woes will only get worse, with the demand for already plentiful jobs such as truck-driver and nurse to see double digit surges by 2024. The need for electricians - much like many other trades - is expected to surge by more than 12 percent, Department of Labor data shows. “It’s the best time in a long time to be looking for a new job,” Johnstown Area Regional Industries Workforce Development Director Deb Balog said, pointing to Cambria County’s 1,000 or more ever-changing job postings monthly since last summer. But for communities such as New Castle, Johnstown and Sharon - areas where unemployment still falls between 5.2 percent (Mercer County) and 6.3 percent (Lawrence County) - the timing couldn’t be worse. ‘We aren’t prepared’ To Gale Measel Jr, of New Castle-based GEM Building Contractors, the problem shouldn’t be a surprise. Manufacturers and the communities they call home “ramped down” for so long that they didn’t consider the possibility of a rebound in the industry, he said. “We have been down and diminished so long,” Measel said. “We have been so low-profile so anti-economic growth for so long (that) we aren’t prepared for any of it.” Balog said there’s more behind the worker shortage than the rapid retirement of a generation of employees. There was an unintended consequence delivered to their Generation X and Millennial offspring. “For decades, the message we were telling high school students was that if they wanted to succeed in life, they had to go to college - they needed that four-year degree,” Balog said. “Ten years ago, there was no push here to train people in the trades or to guide them toward jobs in fields like transportation.” A growing number of jobs that were ignored - or never considered - are now in high demand. “I’ve never seen labor shortages as severe as they are right now - particularly in the skilled trades,” said Shawn Kaufman, human resources director for Somerset-based Riggs Industries. His company was looking to fill dozens of production field jobs such as welding, mechanics, machine operators and painters as of early May. This is happening in areas of Pennsylvania and the nation where blue-collar work once fed many families. Nursing - a field that has provided plenty of well-paying jobs to communities across the United States for decades - is also seeing shortages, driven not by a shallow worker pool but by a surging demand. The pool of qualified candidates might not be large enough to fill Pennsylvania’s projected need forecasted for the years ahead, Quality Life Services Chief Administrative officer Susie Tack Beardsley said. “It used to be nursing was the way to go if you were a woman who wanted a career, but women have so many more options now,” said Beardsley, whose company owns the 204-bed Golden Hill Nursing Home in New Castle. That’s “a wonderful thing” for women in general, she said, but it can leave those tasked with filling licensed nursing positions struggling to fill their rolls. Statewide shortages The state provides data on high-priority jobs to help regional workforce boards figure out where to invest their money, said Keith Bailey, director of the Center for Workforce Information and Analysis for the Department of Labor and Industry. That means trying to help identify areas where their investment might stretch the farthest while helping the most workers and employers. The state also projects what jobs are expected to be in demand, while sorting the information based on the level of training or education needed to do the work. Analysts focus on the “imbalance between what’s needed and what’s available,” Bailey said. As more stores add self-service lanes for shoppers, the number of cashiers needed in Pennsylvania is expected to decline. There were almost 148,000 cashiers in Pennsylvania in 2014, according to Labor and Industry projections. By 2024, that number will be done to 147,000, but there are still 6,000 openings a year for people to do that job. Similarly, while shopping malls struggle with store vacancies, the number of retail salespeople needed across the state is only expected to increase slightly. There were 196,000 retail salespeople in 2014. That’s expected to increase to 202,000 in 2024. There are a projected 7,400 job openings a year for that job. The Wolf Administration has tried to tackle the needs for more and better-trained workers on a number of fronts. The governor has asked the Legislature to provide $50 million in the 2018-19 budget to pay for a variety of workforce development initiatives, which the administration has touted as PAsmart. ‘No longer a luxury’ Some of the fastest-growing jobs in the next few years will be in health care, but labor estimates suggest there will also be strong demand for truck drivers and some industrial jobs. The state predicts these looming increases: —Nursing assistants - 12 percent by 2024, with 2,700 job openings a year. Starting pay is about $23,420, with average pay at $29,190. —Registered nurses - 14 percent by 2024, with close to 5,000 job openings a year. Pay starts at $51,340 a year and averages $68,770. —Electricians - 14 percent, with 600 job openings a year. Pay starts at $38,330 and averages $60,160. —Carpenters - 10 percent, with 1,000 job openings a year. Pay starts at $29,700 a year and averages $48,600. —Tractor-trailer drivers - 12.4 percent, with 2,335 openings a year. Pay starts at $31,410 and averages $45,270. Pennsylvania’s key stakeholders - employers, colleges and other educators - need to prepare to fill the void, the Pittsburgh-based Allegheny Conference on Community Development leaders warned. In their 2017 report “Inflection Point,” the economic development group projected a work-force shortfall of more than 80,000 through 2027 across a 10-county region spanning from Lawrence County to Fayette County. “Our numbers do not add up,” Allegheny Conference Chairman and PNC Financial Services Group CEO Bill Demchak wrote, saying changes must be made to change course. “With Baby Boomers retiring, not enough skilled workers to take their place and slow inward migration ... we are at a critical moment for the future of our region.” Bob Garrett, president of the Greater Susquehanna Chamber of Commerce agreed. For those working to spur economic growth and business development at a local level, practical solutions must be found, he said. “This is no longer a luxury,” he said. “This is not something we can afford to just chat about over cocktails.” ___ David Hurst is a reporter for The Tribune-Democrat. John Finnerty is based in Harrisburg and covers state government and politics. The New Castle News, Sharon Herald, Meadville Tribune and The Daily Item of Sunbury contributed to this report. ___ Online:  https://bit.ly/2GXQO92  ___ Information from: The Tribune-Democrat, http://www.tribune-democrat.com


Eating more fish could prevent Parkinson's disease

Explanation: The subtitle of this news release says the Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden) study “shines more light on the link between consumption of fish and better long-term neurologic health.” But this in vitro lab study only suggests that the fish protein, parvalbumin, binds to a particular human protein called “alpha-synuclein” which has been identified as forming amyloid chains in patients with Parkinson’s disease. The news release should have made it clear that studies of fish cannot be extrapolated to humans, and further, that no cause and effect relationship has been established between amyloid proteins and the development of any neurologic disease. Any news release touching on Parkinson’s disease — or any other of the neurodegenerative disorders that have no cure — is likely to draw a lot of attention from news organizations. Parkinson’s disease alone affects about 1 million Americans and 10 million people worldwide. Although this news release clearly states the disease has no cure, it is riddled with language that implies fish consumption inhibits amyloid formation and that amyloid formation “can be responsible for various diseases,” but that’s an unproven theory and not even addressed by this study. Our concern is that this framing will be adopted by unskeptical reporters and the cause and effect language will be erroneously adopted despite absolutely no evidence to support it.

Chalmers University of Technology,fish diet,Parkinson's disease

Affordability of fish varies widely around the world so we can understand not bringing up costs. The intervention advocated is consuming a fish protein called parvalbumin, or PV for short. Some readers may be curious if this protein can be found in the fish oils that are widely marketed. Nonetheless, the issue of cost doesn’t seem entirely applicable here. The release doesn’t include any numbers to help put the benefits claimed in context. Early in the news release a lead author is quoted as saying: Parvalbumin collects up the ‘Parkinson’s protein’ and actually prevents it from aggregating, simply by aggregating itself first. Lower down in the news release it says: Increasing the amount of fish in our diet might be a simple way to fight off Parkinson’s disease The italics are ours to emphasize that unjustified leaps of causality, and unjustified language, are used to imply benefits that can’t be supported by this study. This study simply hypothesizes that PV, by binding with alpha-synuclein, prevents it from forming amyloid chains with other proteins. We’ve written many times about the uncertainty surrounding amyloids (of all types/subtypes) as a sign of, or contributor to, neurodegenerative diseases like Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s. The news release is dominated by suggestions that parvalbumin could help with Parkinson’s and perhaps other neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s, ALS and Huntington’s but only at the very end do we learn it’s been studied as a a cause of fish allergies. Is this the only harm? We don’t know because harms aren’t included. A major problem with this news release is that it does not mention this was an in vitro experiment; that is, conducted in a controlled environment outside a living organism (aka a laboratory experiment). Above all else that should be highlighted clearly and early in the news release. It should also be made clear that no cause and effect relationship between amyloid proteins and the development of any neurologic disease has ever been established. Put another way, anything that inhibits amyloid formation — whether it be a diet, drug, or something else — does not equate with either preventing or treating any diseases of the brain. While there is no overt disease mongering, there are subtle influences here. For example,  the reader is told of a linkage of amyloid and a host of neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s and then an author notes: “These diseases come with age, and people are living longer and longer. There’s going to be an explosion of these diseases in the future – and the scary part is that we currently have no cures. So we need to follow up on anything that looks promising.” The clear take away message being conveyed is these disease are of concern and eating fish is the answer. The funding sources for the study and any potential conflicts among the researchers are not mentioned in the release. The published article acknowledges funding from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Swedish Research Council, the Olle Engqvist Foundation and the Chalmers Foundation. No alternatives to preventing Parkinson’s and other neurodegenerative diseases are mentioned. On the surface this omission may seem justified since there are none. But perhaps it would help readers to tell them this up front. The following is our suggested wording: “Please note there are no interventions of any kind proven to prevent any neurodegenerative disease. Furthermore, no cause and effect relationship between amyloid (of any kind) and these diseases have ever been established. Finally, this is an in vitro study, so no conclusions regarding clinical efficacy in humans can be made.” Fish is widely available. We’re told the protein of interest, parvalbumin, is found in higher concentrations in certain species, and that this concentration is seasonal and tends to peak in late summer. This is not the first research attempting to link parvalbumin with a host of neurodegenerative diseases including Parkinson’s. And while there is no direct clear claim of novelty, “shining a light…” suggests this is a new discovery. There are glimpses of cautious language in this news release such as: “It will be interesting  to study how parvalbumin distributes within human tissues in more depth.” “The team is careful to note that no definite links (between higher fish consumption) can be established at this point.” But this is drowned out by unjustified phrasing (italicized) like this: “Amyloids are not necessarily a bad thing, but can be responsible for various diseases.” “increasing the amount of fish in our diet might be a simple way to fight off Parkinson’s disease.” “Other neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s, ALS, and Huntington’s disease are also caused by certain amyloid structures interfering in the brain.” Finally, the evidence here is in fish. Not humans. And even if it was in humans the language used in this news release would still be unjustified.


Huggies Snug and Dry brand diapers commonly cause severe diaper rash and chemical burns on infants.

Explanation: Many explanations are possible for these types of phenomena other than the commonly attributed or seemingly obvious ones. As it did with Pampers, we suspect that was the case here

Inboxer Rebellion, diaper rash, huggies, Toxin Du Jour

An item (originally circulated in November 2013) about a child receiving severe chemical burns caused by Huggies Snug and Dry brand disposable diapers is quite similar, save for a change in brand names, to a piece circulated in 2010 about Pampers brand Dry Max diapers. In both cases claims were asserted that the named brands of diapers contained a chemical that in ordinary use could cause severe burns on the skin of the children wearing those diapers. However, in the Pampers case thorough review and testing of that brand of diapers by both U.S. and Canadian government safety regulatory agencies found no cause and no link between Pampers brand diapers and the reported cases of severe diaper rash and chemical burns. This 2013 Huggies case appears to be more of the same. Is it? **ATTENTION*** DIAPER USING PARENTS!!! ***Do NOT use HUGGIES SNUG AND DRY DIAPERS!! !This past Friday night my 21 month old son Parker was treated in the emergency room for 2nd degree Chemical burns on his leg. This was caused by the diaper breaking and the gel on the inside of the diaper being trapped in his pants on his leg while he napped! I am in the process of filing formal complaints with Consumer Affairs and the Better Business Bureau! These departments have informed me Parker is not the only case of this!!! PLEASE SHARE this for all to see and maybe prevent another innocent baby from being harmed! Just as in the Pampers case, the Kimberly-Clark corporation (Huggies’ parent corporation) noted in their response to this item that the materials found in their Snug and Dry brand disposable diapers are the same as those that have been used in nearly every other brand of brand disposable diapers for many years, have all been thoroughly tested, are not toxic or harmful, and have generated very few complaints:  When we first learned about this, we immediately reached out to the mom to express our concern and learn as much as we could about what happened. In addition to requesting samples of the diapers used by the mom for testing, we also initiated an internal review. While we have not yet received any samples from this consumer, our internal review has not found any product issues or abnormalities.All of our products must pass stringent safety reviews prior to making it to retailer shelf. This review includes the super absorbent material in question which has been thoroughly evaluated by more than 450 medical and scientific studies and has been used safely for years in our HUGGIES products and across the diaper industry. There is no indication that this complaint is part of any larger product issues. Complaints of this nature are highly unusual — in fact over the past six months the rate is about one for every 40 million diapers sold. We take our responsibility to provide families with products they can use with confidence very seriously, and will continue to do everything we can to understand what occurred and how we can help. The Superabsorbent material (SAM) found in HUGGIES diapers is being used in virtually all disposable diapers on the market today. Superabsorbent materials (SAM), also known as polyacrylate absorbents, are a family of polymers that have extraordinary absorbency — the particles will absorb up to 100 times their weight in moisture. The safety of superabsorbent material has been proven in more than 450 consumer safety tests that have studied every way a person could come in contact with it — through skin contact, ingestion or even inhalation. Each study has consistently demonstrated the safety and efficacy of this material. The crystals in the diaper are forms of a superabsorbent material that’s been used in diapers for many years. The superabsorbent material looks like a tiny bead when it’s dry and looks like a gel when it’s wet (and mixed with the other fluffy fibers in the diaper). Superabsorbent material in diapers offers significant benefits, like drawing wetness away from baby’s skin and helping to keep baby’s skin healthy. In HUGGIES diapers, superabsorbent material is mixed with the fluffy diaper padding. This material turns liquid into a gel, helping to prevent leakage. Occasionally, you may see small beads of gel on the diaper or on your baby, but the gel is nontoxic and not harmful. Such negative findings inevitably prompt howls of outrage from people along the lines of “How can you claim that all those parents were lying about what happened to their children?” But that isn’t the case: no one is claiming that parents are fabricating such reports; the issue of one of confusing cause with effect. Children can and do develop severe cases of diaper rash and symptoms resembling chemical burns for a variety of reasons independent of what type or brand of diaper they use. To assume that an observed rash or burn in a diaper-wearing toddler must be directly and solely related to the brand of diaper worn without reproducible confirmatory evidence is an example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy. As well, to believe that a particular brand of disposable diaper poses a general danger of severely burning children in its ordinary use requires the additional beliefs that major companies who have been in the disposable diaper business for many years have suddenly unleashed new varieties of those products on the market without conducting the minimal testing necessary to uncover such issues, that the source of the reported hazard is obvious despite the fact that in-depth testing by government regulatory issues can’t uncover it, and that this looming danger threatens all children who wear a particular brand of disposable diaper even though only a relative handful of the millions of consumers who use the brand have reported such issues. A much more logical belief is that such cases, while real, are coincidental or only indirectly related to the brand of diaper used. Children may receive rashes and burns from other external sources unknown to their parents, such as exposure to caustic substances. Children may experience severe allergic reactions to something they’ve been exposed to (inside or outsider of their diapers). Children may develop cases of diaper rash so severe that they resemble chemical burns just as a matter of course and not because of the brand of diaper they’re wearing. Other contributory factors may also come into play that produce rash or burn-like effects in only a small number of cases, such as unrealized interactions with other household products (e.g., bleaches or cleaning agents), the content of a child’s excretions, children being left with unchanged diapers for far too long, or children experiencing some other type of medical issue that creates or exacerbates symptoms. Likewise, confirmation bias is strong in such cases. People report and pay attention to only those cases that fit the suspected pattern, while ignoring cases of parents who report the same symptoms even though their children don’t wear the identified type or brand of diapers, or parents who use the identified type or brand of diaper with no problems.


Eleven states have banned the use of electronic cigarettes inside cars.

Explanation: Associated Media Coverage has expanded its scope into darker fabrications alongside claims like the electronic cigarettes in vehicles ban, promulgating alarming but false stories about a transgender bathroom controversy-related shooting (while the general issue was debated nationwide), Casey Anthony opening a home daycare center, and a dead newborn located in a Walmart DVD bin. While many fake news sites feature disclaimers informing readers their content is falsified, Associated Media Coverage does not.

Junk News, associated media coverage, e-cigarettes, electronic cigarettes

On 28 August 2016, the web site Associated Media Coverage reported that eleven U.S. states had outlawed the use of electronic cigarettes inside cars: Eleven states working in conjunction with the U.S Department of Transportation (D.O.T) have agreed to implement an ordinance banning the use of electronic cigarettes in vehicles – meaning if you are a resident of one of the impacted states, you will be prohibited from utilizing an electronic cigarette while inside your vehicle. The U.S Department of Transportation, who admittedly placed pressure on state officials to implement the ordinance within their respective states are hopeful that representatives across the country will take notice and agree to implement and enforce a similar ban by early 2017. According to Colton Husker, a U.S Department Transportation representative, the ordinance was born out of a necessity to keep drivers safe. According to statistics published on the D.O.T website, approximately 5,834 automobile fatalities related to distracted drivers occurred across the country throughout 2015. This is an almost 30% increase to the 4,523 fatalities reported in 2014. The statistics found on the D.O.T website indicate that approximately 57% of all automobile fatalities in both 2014 and 2015 were reportedly caused by distracted drivers. According to Husker, drivers are becoming increasingly more distracted by the use of electronic cigarettes as the devices are becoming more popular. Representatives from the 11- states that have agreed to implement the ordinance (California, North Carolina, Illinois, Texas, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and New York) have said that their states will begin implementing the ordinance as soon as Early-November 2016 and expect all residents and motorists to be in compliance immediately upon implementation. All participating states have agreed to implement the ordinance by January 3rd, 2017. Included with the article was a list of purported penalties for non-compliance with the new laws, including fines and suspension of driving privileges: First Offense: $100 fine Second Offense: $250 fine Third Offense: $500 fine Fourth Offense: $825 fine, 60-day Suspension of Driver’s License Notably, no other news outlet reported on the multi-state law purportedly affecting drivers across the country despite the widespread popularity of e-cigarettes. That’s because the report was false: Associated Media Coverage is a fake news site that typically spreads fabrications pertaining to non-existent laws and statutes which would affect a specific subset of the population. Prior falsehoods from the site include tales of a looming motorcycle curfew in March 2016, a motorcycle speed ban in August 2016, an impending FDA e-juice ban not long after that, and a claim several jurisdictions were codifying a “two pet maximum” ordinance (meaning many households would be forced to rehome beloved pets).


The coronavirus has seen a “big surge in New Zealand. It's terrible. We don't want that.

Explanation: New Zealand reported nine new cases on Aug. 17, the day of Trump’s remark. The nation previously went over 100 days without an instance of community spread. The U.S. leads the world in cumulative COVID-19 cases and deaths and has reported more than 50,000 new cases per day for most of August and July.

National, Public Health, Coronavirus, Donald Trump,

Speaking in Minnesota ahead of the Democratic National Convention, President Donald Trump compared the ongoing surge of coronavirus cases in the U.S. to the situation in New Zealand, where the virus returned recently after more than 100 days of no community spread. "When you look at the rest of the world ... now all the sudden, a lot of the places that they were using to hold up, they’re having a big surge," Trump said Aug. 17 in a speech at an airport in Mankato, Minn. "They were holding up names of countries, and now they’re saying, ‘Whoops.’" "In fact, even New Zealand. You see what's going on in New Zealand?" the president continued. "They beat it. They beat it. It was like front page, they beat it, because they wanted to show me something. The problem is, big surge in New Zealand. It's terrible. We don't want that." New Zealand, an island nation of about 5 million people, saw the return of the virus’ community spread on Aug. 11 after months with no locally transmitted cases. But on Aug. 17, the day of Trump’s remark, New Zealand had reported just nine new COVID-19 cases. The previous day, it reported 13 new cases, up from seven new cases on Aug. 15. On Aug. 18, following Trump’s comment, New Zealand reported another 13 new cases. The new cases in recent days have caused alarm in New Zealand, where strict lockdown policies and travel restrictions aim to put a lid on the virus. The leadership has responded by postponing the country’s election and locking down Auckland, its largest city. Andrew Noymer, an associate professor of public health at the University of California, Irvine, said it’s a stretch for Trump to say New Zealand had ever "beat" the virus, since the pandemic was raging elsewhere and New Zealand has needed mitigation efforts to keep cases low. But New Zealand’s new cases are a far cry from the outbreak in the U.S., which has reported more than 50,000 new cases per day for most of August and July, according to the COVID Tracking Project. The seven-day average of new cases in the U.S. was 50,927 on Aug. 17. "That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in quite a while," Brooke Nichols, an assistant professor of global health at Boston University, said of Trump’s claim comparing the two nations. As of Aug. 18, New Zealand’s health ministry had recorded 1,643 confirmed and probable cases in total, along with 22 deaths. There are currently 90 active cases in the country. The U.S. leads the world in cumulative cases and deaths, by contrast. It has seen nearly 5.5 million cases and more than 171,000 deaths as of Aug. 18. That’s a quarter of the world’s known cases in a country that, with around 330 million people, represents about 4% of the global population. The disparity is wide even when you adjust for the size of both countries. According to the World Health Organization, the United States has 16,175 confirmed cases for every 1 million people. New Zealand has 268 confirmed cases per million people. It isn’t. New Zealand’s leaders were quick to dismiss Trump’s suggestion that the "big surge" in their country was something the U.S. would not "want." Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said Trump’s comparison between the two nations was "patently wrong," according to local reports. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern gestures during the opening ceremony for Redcliffs School in Christchurch, New Zealand, on June 25, 2020. (AP) "I don’t think there’s any comparison between New Zealand’s current cluster and the tens of thousands of cases that are being seen daily in the United States," Ardern added Aug. 18. Nichols, the Boston University professor, agreed. "New Zealand has had a few dozen cases in the last week, the United States has had a few dozen new cases in the last couple of minutes," Nichols said. "I wish we were ‘surging’ like New Zealand is." The White House and Trump campaign did not respond to our inquiries by deadline. Trump said: "The problem is, big surge in New Zealand. It's terrible. We don't want that." New Zealand reported nine new cases on Aug. 17, the day of Trump’s remark. The U.S., by contrast, has frequently reported more than 50,000 cases per day since July.


Shows a waitress saying, "I lost my job. But I'll sleep better knowing” that the coronavirus relief bill included funding for the Kennedy Center, refugee resettlement, PBS, and congressional salaries: “Thanks, Democrats”

Explanation: The post accurately cites several provisions that are in the coronavirus relief bill passed in late March. But it’s misleading to suggest the financial needs of a laid-off waitress aren’t addressed in the bill. An unemployed waitress would get both a $1,200 check and a $600-a-week increase in unemployment benefits.

Federal Budget, Jobs, Public Health, Workers, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,

It didn’t take long after the enactment of a $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief bill for critics to blame Democrats for larding it with unnecessary spending. One Facebook post that was shared at least 15,000 times features a photograph of a smiling, young waitress. The text says: "I lost my job. But I'll sleep better knowing: $25 million of (coronavirus) relief aid went to the Kennedy Center. $350,000,000 went to refugee resettlement. $75 million went to PBS. $25 million went to congressional salaries and expenses. Thanks, Democrats. It couldn't have happened without you." Some of this text in the post accurately describes elements included in the final version of the bill. However, it also includes some inaccuracies, and the broader depiction of the bill — in which laid-off workers get nothing, at the expense of special interests — is significantly skewed. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We’ll take a look at the text, piece by piece. This is accurate. The funding would go for such purposes as "deep cleaning," maintenance, telework upgrades, employee compensation, rent and utilities for the performing arts center. The Kennedy Center is a federal entity funded by ticket revenue and congressional appropriations, so receiving funding through a congressional bill isn’t unusual. In a statement, the Democratic House leadership said that the Kennedy Center has lost more than $20 million in unrecoverable costs from canceled performances and has lost the ability to generate revenue from ticket sales in the interim. "Without the assistance in the bill, the Kennedy Center would become completely insolvent and potentially unable to reopen," the statement said. If "refugee resettlement" is supposed to mean resettling refugees in the United States, that’s not entirely accurate. The bill doesn’t say specifically where the $350 million earmarked for "Department of State migration and refugee assistance" will go, but much of it may end up as humanitarian assistance to other countries as they grapple with internal displacement of individuals and families due to the virus. Indeed, the Trump administration’s State Department touted its role in this regard as recently as a March 27 news release. "The U.S. Government is leading the world’s humanitarian and health assistance response to the COVID-19 pandemic," the release said, citing an initial investment of $274 million for other countries in need, plus the World Health Organization and UNICEF, prior to passage of the relief bill. "We are mobilizing all necessary resources to respond rapidly, both at home and abroad." This is broadly accurate. The funding is for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which in turn funds public broadcasters such as PBS. The bill provides "stabilization support" for stations seeing declines in non-federal revenues. "Public media stations are the backbone for most communities’ emergency alert, public safety, first-responder and homeland-security services," the Democratic leadership statement said. "If stations are forced to cut jobs, reduce content and services, or close, the nation’s ability to deliver emergency alerts will be significantly diminished." As with the money for the Kennedy Center, it is standard practice for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to receive its funding from congressional legislation. Social media users might think this refers to a pay boost for lawmakers, but we’ve previously rated that assertion . Hollander said there is $25 million for the House in the stimulus to support the chamber’s "capability to telework," including equipment purchases and improvements to the computer network. There is also money to reimburse the staff of the House Child Care Center, cover the costs of food service contracts and pay the House sergeant-at-arms. Separately, the Senate is slated to get $10 million from the stimulus; $1 million will go to the sergeant-at-arms’ office to remain available for coronavirus response, while $9 million will be reserved for "miscellaneous items," including reimbursement for workers at the Senate Employee Child Care Center. None of the money in the bill would go toward paying lawmakers anything more than their current salary level. While some of these provisions mirror elements of a bill offered by House Democrats, that bill never received consideration. Instead, the Senate and the House passed a bill drawn up by leading senators of both parties. The Senate passed the bill 96-0, while the House approved it by a voice vote, a method used for widely supported measures. Because almost all members of both parties approved the bills, Republicans and Democrats alike deserve whatever credit or blame comes from the bill. The biggest misleading element of the post is the notion that the laid-off waitress will get nothing out of the bill. That couldn’t be more wrong. First, assuming she earns less than $75,000 a year, she’ll get $1,200 tax-free from the government, no strings attached. Second, the bill includes historically generous add-on amounts to state unemployment payments. The bill sets aside $260 billion to increase state unemployment payments by $600 a week, or the equivalent of more than $30,000 a year. If the state gives you $400 a week, a fairly typical amount, then you’ll be getting a total of $1,000 a week, or the equivalent of $52,000 a year. (If you made less than this before you lost your job, you’ll actually be earning more than you did previously, at least during the four months provided for in the bill.) The bill also incentivizes states to waive waiting periods for receiving benefits, and provides funds for states to lengthen the time limits for receiving their unemployment benefits by 13 weeks. Meanwhile, in a landmark move, the bill recognizes that gig workers — from freelancers to Uber drivers — need economic assistance in times like these. So they will qualify for the enhanced unemployment provisions in the new bill. A Facebook post shows a waitress saying, "I lost my job. But I'll sleep better knowing" that the coronavirus relief bill included funding for the Kennedy Center, refugee resettlement, PBS, and congressional salaries: "Thanks, Democrats." While the post oversimplifies some of those provisions, they are indeed part of the bill. However, the post gives the strong impression that the bill offers nothing to laid-off workers, and that’s flat wrong. Every American earning less than the income caps will get a $1,200 check, and anyone who starts drawing unemployment payments will see those topped up by additional federal payments of $600 a month. Also, the bill that was passed received almost blanket support from both Republicans and Democrats.