Pre and Post Testing Show Reversal of Memory Loss From Alzheimer’s Disease in Ten Patients

Explanation: This is a news release about an update of a small 2014 study on a program to reverse cognitive impairment associated with Alzheimer’s disease. The program includes as many as 36 interventions which must be followed. Right out of the starting gate the release misinforms by using the terms mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease interchangeably. They are not the same. The study reports “unprecedented” improvement in 10 patients with “early Alzheimer’s (AD) or its precursors” who adhered to the protocol, dubbed “metabolic enhancement for neurodegeneration,” or MEND, for five to 24 months. All but one of the patients had genes (APOE) associated with Alzheimer’s. The news release provides data on just three of the cases in the study and does not discuss costs or potential challenges of adhering to this protocol. The news release reveals that the developer of the program, University of California, Los Angeles neurology professor Dale Bredesen, M.D., has a deal to publish a book for lay readers in 2017. Moreover, researchers say their findings are strong enough to warrant widespread genetic testing so those at risk for the disease can receive preventive measures. The book deal and the recommendation of genetic testing are troubling since there are just a handful of case studies to back up the program. Bredesen himself is quoted in the news release acknowledging the need for large-scale clinical trials. But the minor use of cautious language in describing the study as “small” and the call for future larger trials do not make up for the intentional muddying of the symptoms of age-related memory loss and Alzheimer’s disease. As the news release points out, Alzheimer’s disease is a huge and growing problem, affecting 5.4 million Americans and creating an economic burden on the health care system. No medications are available to stop its progress. There’s evidence that non-drug interventions that are designed to fight inflammation and improve blood sugar regulation like those in the MEND program could be effective. The MEND program includes the elimination of processed foods, regular exercise, yoga and medication to reduce stress, melatonin to extend sleep, supplements such as fish oil, vitamins D3 and B12, and hormone replacement therapy. However, the MEND treatment protocol involves so many factors it may be difficult to determine which ones are effective. To date nothing has been proven to prevent Alzheimer’s. Medications are available but they are expensive, may delay progression marginally, and have side effects.

The news release does not discuss the cost of this complex intervention or the cost of genetic testing for Alzheimer’s. The costs for adhering to this protocol would quickly add up, but the descriptions are so vague that it’s impossible to make informed projections. It cites “diet, brain stimulation, exercise, pharmaceuticals, optimization of sleep, specific pharmaceuticals and vitamins,and multiple additional steps that affect brain chemistry.” The research consists of 10 case studies in which all subjects showed some degree of improvement. But the news release gives information about only three patients — out of 10 in the study — who had the most dramatic improvements.It relates those patients’ self-reported advances in functionality and gives measurements in memory improvement for two patients. It does not warn that self-reported improvements are likely to be biased by the patient’s expectation of benefit from the program. It does not describe the specific interventions used for each patient. The news release doesn’t tell us the total number of patients that were enrolled in this protocol. Were only the 10 that showed improvement included in the case study? What about the rest? The release appears to cherry pick some data regarding risks and uses relative risks only, no absolute numbers. For example, you cannot tell from this release what your chances are of getting Alzheimer’s if you have one or two APOE genes. Claims found in the release such as “Follow up testing showed some of the patients going from abnormal to normal” are both grandiose and unsubstantiated, but they could raise patient and caregivers’ hopes that they or a loved one could reverse their Alzheimer’s symptoms. The news release does not mention any potential risks of any aspect of the protocol. Since we do not really know what the protocol consists of we have no way of assessing potential risk. Neither the news release nor the study explain how the patients were selected, or whether there were any drop-outs. It would be useful to know whether participants had a previously demonstrated ability to adhere to treatment protocols or family support that would help them stick to the intensive MEND regimen. The news release does not mention that at least one patient dropped out temporarily, raising a concern that the program, which is complex and requires many lifestyle changes, may be difficult for some patients to follow. The news release also doesn’t point out that it’s unknown how long observed improvements will be maintained. The program as a whole has yet to be proven effective and safe in a broad population. The news release acknowledges this fact with a quote from Bredesen: “Even though we see the far-reaching implications of this success, we also realize that this is a very small study that needs to be replicated in larger numbers at various sites.” It would be difficult to perform a rigorous clinical trial on this protocol since it’s reportedly tailored to each patient and involves 36 potential interventions. Clinical trials usually test only one treatment at a time, preferably comparing it to a placebo. The news release points out the vast and growing number of Alzheimer’s cases. But it edges toward disease-mongering when it quotes a researcher suggesting the protocol can “transform the perception and reality of Alzheimer’s disease from a death sentence to a preventable reversible condition.” It also recommends genetic testing for everyone, which clearly is not appropriate or warranted. The release states, “Now we’re recommending that people find out their genetic status as early as possible so they can go on prevention.” The news release notes that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided some funding, but it does not list all of the study’s funding sources. Those include the Accelerate Fund, an early-stage investment fund based in Canada. The researcher also apparently stands to benefit from sales of a book set to be released in May 2017 through a mainstream book publisher. The news release gives the briefest nod to an alternative, stating that the protocol to reverse memory loss “follows the abject failure” of single-drug therapies for Alzheimer’s. In reality, many interventions, not only drugs, have been tried and none have been found to work. Some of the MEND interventions, such as dietary changes and exercise, may be readily available. But the intensiveness that this approach requires would make it hard for most people to access financially and logistically. Perhaps the book about the program, when it publishes, will make this clear, but the news release does not. The news release claims that the research “is the first to objectively show that memory loss in patients can be reversed, and improvement sustained” using the complex protocol. We rate this unsatisfactory since the release implies throughout that the protocol can reverse memory loss in Alzheimer’s patients when that is not indicated by the limited evidence. There are several instances of unjustifiable language in the news release, given the fact that this was an uncontrolled 10-person study. Some examples: “The magnitude of improvement in these ten patients is unprecedented” “Transform the perception and reality of Alzheimer’s disease from a death sentence to a preventable reversible condition” “Now we’re recommending that people find out their genetic status as early as possible so they can go on prevention.”


GOP senators blink on a big chance to repeal ‘Obamacare’.

Explanation: After seven years of emphatic campaign promises, Senate Republicans demonstrated they didn’t have the stomach to repeal “Obamacare” on Wednesday when it actually counted. The Senate voted 55-45 to reject legislation to throw out major portions of Barack Obama’s law without replacing it.

U.S. News, AP Top News, Health Care Upheaval , Health, Rand Paul, Legislation, Politics, North America, Business, Laws, Donald Trump, Bills, Barack Obama

Seven Republicans joined all Democrats in rejecting a measure by GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky that would have repealed most of former President Obama’s health care law, with a two-year delay but no replacement. Congress passed nearly identical legislation in 2015 and sent it to Obama, who unsurprisingly vetoed it. Yet this time, with Republican President Donald Trump in the White House itching to sign the bill, the measure failed on the Senate floor. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that repealing “Obamacare” without replacing it would cost more than 30 million Americans their insurance coverage, and that was a key factor in driving away more Republican senators than Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could afford to lose in the closely divided Senate. The result frustrated other GOP senators, some of whom expressed disbelief that their colleagues would flip-flop on legislation they had voted for only two years ago and long promised to voters. Of the current Republican senators, only moderate Susan Collins of Maine opposed the 2015 repeal bill. “Make no mistake: Today’s vote is a major disappointment to people who were promised full repeal,” said Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska. “We still have a long, long way to go — both in health policy and in honesty.” Yet the outcome was hardly a shock in a Senate that’s already shown that unity is elusive when it comes to dealing with Obamacare. The real-world implications of repeal have proven sobering to GOP senators answering to voters who’ve come to rely on expanded insurance coverage under the law. It’s not over yet. But what the party’s senators might end up agreeing on instead is far from clear. They are plunging ahead with debate toward their unknown goal, pressured by an impatient president. By week’s end Republicans hope to reach agreement among themselves, and eventually with the House, on some kind of repeal and replacement for the Obama law they have reviled for so long. “We have to keep working hard,” said McConnell, R-Ky. “We’re determined to do everything we can to succeed. We know our constituents are counting on us.” One possibility taking shape in talks among senators was a “skinny repeal” that would abolish just a few of the key elements of Obama’s law including its mandates that everyone purchase insurance and its taxes that all GOP senators can agree to oppose. But in a sign of the general confusion, some said the tactic was aimed chiefly at moving the process forward into the purview of a committee of Senate-House bargainers while others expressed the hope that the House would swallow a “skinny bill” whole, freeing Congress to move on to other issues. Either way, after weeks spent on the issue including false starts and near-death experiences that have eaten up months of Trump’s presidency, the realization was dawning on senators that they may be unable to pass anything more complex for now than a lowest-common-denominator bill. “At the end of the day, we’ve got to start somewhere. This is a start,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. The day’s proceedings began with prodding from Trump, who’s proven impatient and inconsistent throughout the health care debate and yet can claim some credit for resuscitating Senate talks after McConnell essentially declared them dead last week. The president singled out Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who’d voted the day before against opening long-awaited debate on the legislation, and also opposed a wide-ranging McConnell amendment Tuesday that offered a replacement for Obamacare and went down to defeat. “Senator @lisamurkowski of the Great State of Alaska really let the Republicans, and our country, down yesterday. Too bad!” Trump wrote. “I don’t really follow Twitter that much,” Murkowski remarked to reporters later with a shrug. Murkowski was also among the seven GOP senators who voted “no” Wednesday on the repeal-only bill. The others were Collins, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Dean Heller of Nevada, John McCain of Arizona, Rob Portman of Ohio and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. In a statement defending his vote, Portman wrote: “We need a rescue plan for Ohio families who are suffering under the status quo, not one that makes the health care system worse for Ohio families.” Senators were working their way through 20 hours of debate. At week’s end, a “vote-a-rama” of rapid-fire voting on a mountain of amendments was expected before moving to final passage — of something. Internal GOP differences remain over how broadly to repeal the law, how to reimburse states that would suffer from the bill’s Medicaid cuts and whether to let insurers sell cut-rate, bare-bones coverage that falls short of the requirements. While pressure and deal-making helped win over vacillating Republicans to begin debate, they remained fragmented over what to do next. Several pointedly left open the possibility of opposing the final bill if it didn’t suit their states. “It seems the Republican majority is no clearer on what the end game is, because there’s no good way out of this,” said Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York. ___ Associated Press writers Stephen Ohlemacher and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar contributed.


U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi's Twitter account deleted a tweet showing her encouraging tourism to Chinatown weeks after President Donald Trump closed the U.S. border to China.

Explanation: Merck & Co (MRK.N) said on Friday it expects to make licensed doses of its recently approved Ebola vaccine available in the third quarter of 2020 and price the single-dose injection at the lowest possible access price for poor and middle-income countries.

The vaccine, Ervebo, was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday, a month after Europe gave its nod to the vaccine, a move that has been hailed by the World Health Organization. “We have made a commitment to making the vaccine available to GAVI-eligible countries at the lowest possible access price,” Merck spokesman Skip Irvine said. “We have made that commitment but we have not yet established the price for the vaccine.”  Stockpile of 500,00 doses of Ebola vaccine is being established for emergency use in outbreaks of the deadly fever by the GAVI global vaccine alliance, Reuters reported earlier this month. The stockpiling will start with Merck’s Ervebo vaccine. GAVI, a public-private partnership backed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the WHO, the World Bank and UNICEF, arranges bulk buys to reduce vaccine costs for poor countries. “We are partnering with both GAVI and WHO to put that stockpile in place as quickly as possible,” the company said in a statement, adding that the stockpile of vaccines will be governed and executed by the owner of the stockpile and not by Merck. The Ebola virus causes hemorrhagic fever and spreads from person to person through direct contact with body fluids. It kills around half of those it infects. There have been more than 3,000 cases of Ebola, including 2,199 deaths, in the outbreak that was declared in August 2018. The WHO declared it an international emergency in July 2019. The company said it was working closely with the U.S. government, WHO, UNICEF, and GAVI to prepare against the disease. Johnson and Johnson’s (JNJ.N) two-dose vaccine is currently being reviewed by the European regulator. The company is in discussion with the FDA for U.S. approval. Merck shares rose as much as up 2.8% to record high of $92.55 on Friday.


It’s common around Christmas time for people to warn one another             about the alleged toxicity of poinsettias.

Explanation: Poinsettia plants are poison to children and pets

This is one of those beliefs that is so widespread that a survey of             florists found that most of them believed it to be true. That’s             because it has been the conventional understanding about poinsettias             for many years. The consensus of government agencies, health centers, veterinary             groups, and plant and             flower organizations that we’ve surveyed, however, is that poinsettias are not             toxic and do not pose a health threat to children or pets. The belief in poinsettia poison appears to extend back to 1919 when             the two-year-old child of a U.S. Army officer died. It was             believed that the death was caused by the child ingesting poinsettia             leaves. The American Society of Florists has looked into the             matter extensively and says there was never any proof that             poinsettia leaves were responsible for the child’s death and the             report was later determined to be hearsay. The America Society of Florists joined with researchers at Ohio             State University to test various parts of the poinsettia plant on             rats. Their conclusion was that there was no toxicity or any             other side effects even when the rats were given large             doses. POISENDEX is the source of poison information for the majority of poison             control centers. It says that a 50-pound child would have to             eat more than a pound-and-a-quarter of poinsettia leaves to exceed             the doses used in the Ohio State research, which would be 500 to 600             leaves. The American Society of Florists says no other consumer plant has             been tested for toxicity more than the poinsettia. The ASPCA Animal Poison Center in Urbana, Illinois says it regards             poinsettias as having such low toxicity risk that it doesn’t even             recommend decontaminating animals that may have ingested them. The center says that there can sometimes be gastrointestinal             distress from having ingested something alien to the digestive             system. The American Veterinary             Medicine Association of America (AVMA), doesn’t include poinsettias             on its list of plants that are a threat to animals. Because of the belief that poinsettias are toxic, there are numerous             visits to hospitals each year by concerned parents or pet owners whose children             or pet have ingested or in some other way been exposed to             poinsettias. A study released in 2000 by Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh and             Carnegie Mellon University found that out of nearly 23,000             poinsettia exposures reported to poison control centers nationwide,             there was essentially no toxicity of significance of any kind. Comments


Congo’s Ebola outbreak poses challenges for bush meat.

Explanation: For 25 years, Patrick Matondo has earned a living buying and selling monkeys, bats and other animals popularly known as bush meat along the Congo River. Standing on the riverbank in Mbandaka, a city affected by the deadly new outbreak of the Ebola virus, the father of five said that for the first time he’s worried he won’t be able to support his family.

AP Top News, Animals, Health, Ebola virus, Congo River, Africa, Bats, Monkeys

“Since Ebola was declared, business has decreased by almost half. It’s really, really bad,” the 47-year-old said, hanging his head. Congo’s latest Ebola outbreak declared in May has 38 confirmed cases, including 14 deaths. The discovery of a handful of Ebola cases among Mbandaka’s more than 1 million residents also has hurt the economy, especially among traders of meat from wild animals. The virus, which spreads through bodily fluids of those infected, has been known to jump from animals such as monkeys and bats to humans. In the West Africa outbreak four years ago that killed more than 11,000 people, it was widely suspected that the epidemic began when a 2-year-old boy in Guinea was infected by a bat. Usually the wild animals are highly sought-after as popular sources of protein along with beef and pork, and cargo ships carrying the smoked meat arrive daily in the city, the trade hub for Congo’s northwestern Equateur province. Meanwhile, bush meat markets still see locals bartering for the animals, both dead and alive. Prospective buyers pause at tables piled with monkey meat, picking up blackened chunks one by one for a closer look. “Meat is very important for people here. It’s one of the biggest industries in Mbandaka,” said Matondo, a leader in the city’s bush meat association. Dr. Pierre Rollin, an Ebola expert with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said if the meat is cooked, smoked or dried it kills the virus. The people at greatest risk are hunters and butchers who process the meat, he said. The World Health Organization has advised against trade and travel restrictions because of the current outbreak, which is mostly in remote areas. Boats with bush meat continue to depart for the capital, Kinshasa, 600 kilometers (323 miles) downstream and for villages tucked deep in the rainforest up and down the river. Disease experts warned, however, that precautions are still necessary as monkeys and bats are sold live throughout the region. Traders said demand has dwindled because of Ebola, with sales for many dropping from about 100 animals a day to about 20. “Kinshasa and Brazzaville told us to stop sending monkeys and bats,” said another trader in Mbandaka, Willy Taban, who said his business has been cut in half in recent weeks. He was referring to buyers in the capital of the nearby Republic of Congo, which is across the river from Kinshasa. Congo’s health minister, Dr. Oly Ilunga Kalenga, said there are no plans to ban sales of bush meat in the province since bush meat is not the primary way the Ebola virus spreads. Instead, the government is focusing on good hygiene practices such as hand-washing, he said. Health officials are also tracking down anyone who had close contact with anyone infected by the virus, offering an experimental vaccine and promoting safe burials and other practices. Such health efforts can be challenging in communities where many people consider Ebola to be witchcraft. Others are skeptical that the disease exists, even though this is the Central African country’s ninth outbreak. One Mbandaka trader, Gamo Louambo, said he’s still shipping 100 wild animals to Kinshasa daily and said he won’t stop eating them as they’re his main source of food. “I don’t see Ebola. It isn’t here,” he said. In West Africa, where there had never been an outbreak before 2014, getting people to accept that Ebola was a real disease was key, said WHO’s Jonathan Polonsky. For those in Kinshasa, “Ebola is very far away,” said Defede Mbale, immigration chief at the capital’s port of Maluku. Pointing to a poster of safe Ebola practices on his desk, he said the government has provided extra resources to patrol the river and take people’s temperatures as they arrive by boats, checking for fevers. He doesn’t doubt the deadly virus exists, but Mbale said there’s only so much that he’s willing to change. “We have our customs and they won’t change because of Ebola,” he said. “We’ll eat all foods.” ___ Follow Africa news at https://twitter.com/AP_Africa


Nicotine patch may help improve memory, study finds

Explanation: Both stories had some strong elements, but MSNBC took the important step of bringing in independent commentary to help readers understand the possible import of the findings, the limitations of the study and the potential downsides to long term nicotine treatment. Memory loss is one of the growing areas targeted by pharmaceutical companies for the next blockbuster drug. But there is a difference between getting older and forgetting a phone number and getting older and forgetting where you live. Reporting on any potential memory loss treatment needs to carefully distinguish between types of memory loss and the true nature of the research going into the treatment.

Neither of the stories we reviewed discussed costs. We found a range of prices online, including one big box pharmacy patch for roughly $2.70 a day. Both stories quantified the benefits of nicotine patches by using percentages and not fully explaining what those percentages meant. (Note:  we couldn’t find the percentages quoted in the journal article itself but they did appear in an American Academy of Neurology news release and in a a Vanderbilt news release.) This story gave a little more detail about the study design, which would allow readers to better understand what was being measured. Key line:  “The nicotine may simply be improving symptoms and not helping with the actual disease.” We thought the story was a little light on potential harms. The story mentions that patches have been shown to be safe for long-term use, but it also ends on a cautious note from an epidemiologist who says that nicotine is addictive. Even the Vanderbilt news release was far more complete about harms observed: “minor side effects like nausea and dizziness, similar to what a person would experience when smoking a cigarette for the first time, Newhouse said. Those on the nicotine patch also experienced mild weight loss, not surprising since nicotine is an appetite suppressant. There were also no withdrawal symptoms reported when the study participants stopped using the nicotine patch.” We would have liked to have seen this story at least note what the TIME story noted, which is that there is some research that links nicotine to cancer. This story does an adequate job in explaining the study design and explaining exactly how nicotine might be working to improve memory. We wish it had included one element from the TIME story and expanded on it:  “when clinical experts rated overall change in the patients, they did not see a significant difference between the two groups.” That’s an important finding and, possibly, could have led to a different lead and headline for both stories. The story does not engage in disease mongering, but we wish it had done a better job distinguishing between the technical term of mild cognitive impairment and forgetfulness. We require two things for a story to get a satisfactory score on this criterion. Both TIME and MSNBC got only one of those elements – oddly each reporting a different one but not the other. The story makes use of two independent sources. It did miss, though, the conflict of interest issues that TIME found, reporting that some of the authors on the study have received drug company funding and funding from tobacco makers. It also noted that the nicotine patches themselves were provided by Pfizer. The story does not talk about any alternatives to nicotine patches, which is troubling. It says that “there are no medications approved to treat those symptoms.” But there are known techniques for improving memory that could have been given at least a passing mention. We’ll rule this Not Applicable. The story should have made it clear the types of patches that were studied and the dosing. Most readers probably know that nicotine patches are widely available, but the types and doses vary. With just one line, the story at least established that there has been other research in the field of nicotine and memory:  “But there has been some research suggesting that nicotine might actually offer some protection to the cells being damaged by Alzheimer’s.” That’s more than what the TIME story provided. Because it had independent sources, it’s clear that the story didn’t rely solely on a news release – although, as noted, the 46 percent improvement and 26 percent decline statistics appear to come from an American Academy of Neurology news release or a Vanderbilt news release. We could not find those stats in the study itself.


Survey finds many ticks carry disease in North Dakota.

Explanation: A high percentage of ticks found in North Dakota are carrying potentially deadly diseases, according to the second annual state Department of Health study of the parasites.

Wildlife, Health, Ticks, North Dakota, Minot

Four zoos, 37 veterinarians, and state and federal wildlife officials participated in the 2018 study, the Minot Daily News reported. “They all submitted ticks, which was a huge help,” said Laura Cronquist, NDDOH division of disease control. “We had more coverage throughout the state in 2018, which was real nice.” The state was divided into eight regions for the tick surveillance survey that started in 2017. Pools of up to 20 ticks from each region were inspected for the existence of several diseases. The most common tick in North Dakota is the American dog tick, which is a close relative of the Rocky Mountain wood tick. Both are known for carrying the dreaded Rocky Mountain spotted fever virus which, if left untreated, can be deadly. American dog ticks and Rocky Mountain wood ticks made up 176 pools, with 106 testing positive for disease carrying pathogens. Deer ticks, which are known carriers of Lyme disease, were found in 22 of the 25 counties surveyed. Rancher John Heiser, of Grassy Butte, contributed nearly half of all the 13,640 ticks that were collected and sent to the state laboratory for disease testing. ___ Information from: Minot Daily News, http://www.minotdailynews.com


Explanation: GOP full of hot air about Obama's "light switch tax"

National, Taxes, House Republican Conference,

Taxpayers may have been shocked to learn from House Republicans that President Barack Obama wants to pay for health care by charging them to turn on a light. "The administration raises revenue for nationalized health care through a series of new taxes, including a light switch tax that would cost every American household $3,128 a year," the House Republican Conference said in a Web post and press release titled "Questions on the Budget for President Obama," distributed March 24. "What effect will this have on Americans struggling to pay their mortgages?" it asked. This alleged "light switch tax" is a reference to Obama's proposal to tax power companies for carbon dioxide emissions, and allow companies to trade emissions credits among themselves. That's called a cap-and-trade program, and Republicans say the companies would just pass the tax on to electricity consumers. So any revenue raised by a cap-and-trade program amounts to a "light switch tax" on consumers, the House Republicans alleged. To back up the claim, their staff pointed us to an  M.I.T. report  that says a similar a cap-and-trade proposal (the administration has not yet detailed their own version) would raise $366 billion per year. If you divide that by the 117 million households in the United States, you find it would cost each household $3,128, they said. But is it that simple? Can you just assume consumers would be out $366 billion since that's how much the program would raise from fuel companies? No. "It's just wrong," said John Reilly, an energy, environmental and agricultural economist at M.I.T. and one of the authors of the report. "It's wrong in so many ways it's hard to begin." Not only is it wrong, but he told the House Republicans it was wrong when they asked him. "Someone from the House Republicans had called me (March 20) and asked about this," Reilly said. "I had explained why the estimate they had was probably incorrect and what they should do to correct it, but I think this wrong number was already floating around by that time." It continues to float. That's just not how economists calculate the cost of a tax proposal, Reilly said. The tax might push the price of carbon-based fuels up a bit, but other results of a cap-and-trade program, such as increased conservation and more competition from other fuel sources, would put downward pressure on prices. Moreover, consumers would get some of the tax back from the government in some form. The report did include an estimate of the net cost to individuals, called the "welfare" cost. It would be $30.89 per person in 2015, or $79 per family if you use the same average household size the Republicans used of 2.56 people. The cost would grow over time as the program ramps up, but the average annual cost over time in today's dollars — that is, the "average annual net present value cost" — is still just $85 per person, Reilly said. That would be $215.05 per household. A far cry from $3,128. And that isn't the only inaccuracy in the claim. The Republican press release said the cap-and-trade program would pay for "nationalized health care." But Obama's  health care proposal  is not for "nationalized health care." It does call for a "National Health Insurance Exchange" with private insurance options plus a new public plan based on the one currently available to members of Congress — but consumers could still keep their private insurance if they want, as Obama emphasized during his presidential campaign. Even if it were true that Obama wants to nationalize health care, he does not envision paying for health care reform with the cap-and-trade program as the Republicans alleged. Rather, his $634 billion health care reserve fund is to come from efficiencies in Medicare and Medicaid and decreased deductions for some charitable contributions by upper-income taxpayers, according to Obama's proposed budget. The House Republicans partially corrected this portion of the claim, changing their Web site and sending out an updated press release that says the cap-and-trade program would pay for "increased spending" rather than health care. But it still calls cap-and-trade a "light switch tax" and claims the whole cost would come from consumers. If the Republicans had simply misstated the results of the MIT study, the Truth-O-Meter would have been content giving this one a False. But for them to keep repeating the claim after the author of the study told them it was wrong means we have to set the meter ablaze. . Update, May 6, 2009 Two days after we published this item, Reilly sent a letter to Rep. John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House, complaining that his study "has been misrepresented in recent press releases distributed by the National Republican Congressional Committee. The press release claims our report estimates an average cost per family of a carbon cap and trade program that would meet targets now being discussed in Congress to be over $3,000, but that is nearly 10 times the correct estimate, which is approximately $340." (The $340 is a cost per family of four, comparable to the $215 we used as the cost per household of 2.56 people.) Reilly said it was "simplistic and misleading" to interpret the statistics the way the Republicans did because the administration's cap and trade proposal has "been designed to offset the energy cost impacts on middle and lower income households." A day later Boehner responded with a statement that insisted $3,128 was accurate. "In reality, it would be a tax of up to $3,100 per family on every American family that drives a car, buys products manufactured in the United States, or flips on a light switch," Boehner said in the statement. On April 22, the conservative  Weekly Standard  came to the defense of the Republicans and published  an article  that said Reilly had erred in calculating the cost. It said that Reilly had since corrected the figure from the original $340 to $800. The article by John McCormack, an editorial assistant at the publication, said that even with the corrected figure, Reilly was "still low-balling the cost of cap and trade by using some fuzzy logic. In reality, cap and trade could cost the average household more than $3,900 per year." The  Weekly Standard  noted that Obama plans to use some of the cap-and-trade revenues to fund his "making work pay" tax credit of $400 per individual and $800 per family per year but then did not reflect that plan in the ultimate cost to households. It said there was no proof that Reilly is correct to assume that "the $3,128 will be 'returned' to each household." The article also said that our PolitiFact item was incorrect because we relied on Reilly's numbers. Several PolitiFact readers who apparently believe that Reilly's corrected figure means the Republicans are now accurate, wrote to us and urged us to publish a correction. So we have revisited the numbers to provide this update. First, we should emphasize that our original item was simple and straightforward. The Republicans said their claim was based on the MIT study. But Reilly, the author of that study, said the Republicans were misrepresenting his work. And not only that, he said he'd told them they were misrepresenting his work  before  they made the claim, and they made the claim anyway. That struck us as an egregious falsehood. And it's important to recognize that our  rating was on the overall statement that, "The administration raises revenue for nationalized health care through a series of new taxes, including a light switch tax that would cost every American household $3,128 a year." The first part of that statement about nationalized health care is completely false. The Obama administration is not proposing nationalized health care, a phrase we believe is meant to invoke fears of socialized medicine. Yet Republicans have repeatedly made that inaccurate claim. So that part of the claim was and remains ridiculously false. Now, in light of Reilly's revised number and Boehner's refusal to change what he says, let's reconsider the second part of the claim, that the Obama administration is proposing "a light switch tax that would cost every American household $3,128 a year." First, calling it a light switch tax remains incorrect. That implies that it is a federal tax levied on consumers when in fact it is an extrapolation of the per-family burden of a new federal charge that would be levied on energy companies. To say it "would cost every American household $3,128 a year" suggests tremendous precision. But we have found virtually no precision about anything to do with the cap and trade proposals because they are still very much just in the talking stages. Indeed, the House Democratic version is known as the "discussion draft" and, although there are some broad concepts, key details about how the program would work, its ultimate cost and how Americans would be reimbursed for higher energy costs are still far from final. But, given Reilly's corrected number, is it now accurate to say it will cost every household $3,128 a year? No, it's not. As we said in our original item, Reilly's analysis has produced two different ways to measure the cost of a cap and trade system. One way is the total estimate of federal revenues from a cap and trade auction, which indeed works out to $3,128 per family in the United States. That's the amount of money the energy companies would have to pay the federal government, and presumably the companies would pass those costs to consumers through higher prices. The issue then becomes whether or not the Obama administration intends to offset that cost to families. Republicans take the position, which was echoed by the  Weekly Standard,  that the Obama administration has no such plans. Reilly says the administration does. Who's right? Of course, we can't really know what the administration intends to do, but the available record makes it pretty clear that the White House has made plans to return to families the money the cap and trade program might cost them in energy bills. Some of it -- $400 per year for individuals, $800 for families -- would go directly back to families through the "making work pay" tax credit totalling $65 billion per year, according to  the Obama budget proposal  . An additional $15 billion per year would benefit them indirectly through research and development on clean energy technologies. And the budget specifies that "all additional net proceeds will be used to further compensate the public." That backs up Reilly's claim that the $3,128 is effectively returned to people. The second way to look at the cost of cap and trade is through the impact the proposal would have on the overall economy -- the extent to which the new system would constrain the economy and slow its growth. That's the source of Reilly's $340 number, which he has corrected to $800. That number is still far short of the very precise $3,128 the Republicans have been using. And Republican leaders continue to toss around the $3,100 number, often with no caveats or qualifiers -- or mention of the $800. We called Reilly to get his reaction to the article in the  Weekly Standard  and the Republicans' latest claim  . He said the  Weekly Standard  editorial assistant who wrote the story "just completely twisted the whole thing." He said his correction to the $800 figure didn't substantially improve the accuracy of what the Republicans are contending. Their claim "is a misrepresentation. They are basing (the $3,128) on our study and that is an incorrect use of our study. It's false." Here at PolitiFact, we're sure there will be plenty of other claims in the next few months that will allow us to further examine the cost of a cap and trade proposal. This claim has centered on Reilly's two-year-old study, but other studies have been done more recently and will soon be in the political mix. But for now, this claim remains a serious distortion in many ways. It is a ridiculous falsehood to say the money is being used "for nationalized health care." It is inaccurate to call it a "light switch tax." And it is incorrect to cite a precise "tax" of $3,128 -- with no caveats or qualifiers -- when the Obama administration has specified how the money would be returned to people. Given Reilly's comments that they are using his numbers improperly, we see nothing to change our conclusion. So our original ruling stands: . - Bill Adair, PolitiFact Editor


Donald Trump owned stock in Thermo-Fisher Scientific at a time when his presidential administration was advocating for a COVID-19 test that uses Thermo-Fisher equipment.

Explanation: At least 11 people have been killed and more than 300 treated in hospital after drinking coconut wine in the Philippines, including some who were celebrating at a Christmas party, health and local authorities said on Monday.

The poisoning occurred in Laguna and Quezon, two provinces south of Manila, and all had consumed lambanog, a drink popular in provinces and consumed widely during holidays and celebrations. Many were admitted to hospitals on the urging of mayor Vener Munoz in Rizal, Laguna, where the deaths occurred between Thursday and Sunday. Two people who had been in critical condition were improving, he told local radio. The coconut wine that was consumed had been made in his town, he added. Blood tests and samples of leftover lambanog would be collected and analyzed on Monday, the Department of Health said. “All had a sad history of lambanog ingestion,” the department said, referring to those poisoned. “Some bought for leisure drinking and birthday party, while others were donated by local officials during their Christmas party.”  Unregulated production and sales of lambanog are common in the Philippines, and it is often made illegally with dangerous additives. The country’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has previously warned about the dangerous and prohibited use of methanol as an additive in home brews. A year ago, the FDA and police were deployed to locate and confiscate unregistered lambanog that was being openly sold to the public, and threatened to prosecute sellers. Twenty-one people died after consuming lambanog last year, media reported.


‘Hippie’ island off Seattle sees shift in low vaccine rate.

Explanation: Sarah Day is a school nurse with “street cred” when it comes to the polarizing issue of vaccines on an idyllic island in Washington state known for its rural beauty, counterculture lifestyle and low immunization rates.

AP Top News, Immunizations, Health, Washington, North America, Lifestyle, Science, Seattle, U.S. News

Since she began communal living on Vashon Island more than 20 years ago, the registered nurse has advocated for getting kids their shots against a loud contingent of anti-vaccine parents in the close-knit community of about 11,000 accessible only by ferry, a serene 20-minute ride from Seattle. And it may now be working, thanks to a “perfect storm” of changes being felt on the island, Day said. The Vashon Island School District has seen a significant increase in fully immunized children. The number of kindergartners who received the required set of state-mandated vaccines jumped by 31% in the past six years, from 56% to nearly 74% in the 2017-18 school year, according to the King County Public Health Department. Amid the nation’s highest number of measles cases in 25 years, pro-vaccine advocates are cheering the apparent shift that challenges Vashon’s reputation as a hotbed of highly educated, anti-establishment parents who choose not to vaccinate their children from preventable and potentially devastating diseases. “We’ve been the poster children for the anti-vaccine or vaccine-hesitancy movement for so long,” Day said. She attributes the rising numbers to increasingly visible pro-vaccine information, expanded access to shots and media coverage of measles outbreaks in the Pacific Northwest and New York this year. The island town with deep roots in organic farming has long drawn those who want to escape urban sprawl and others wary of putting chemicals in their bodies, whether in their food or medical care. Kids run barefoot through untamed forests and families still raise fruits and vegetables without pesticides to share in meals in communal houses. It also has its share of city commuters, tourists and million-dollar vacation homes with sweeping views of Mount Rainier, as well as locals pushing the science that vaccines are safe. While the gains are notable, the Vashon school district still has one of the lowest vaccine rates in the U.S. It is far below the 95 percent target that a majority of U.S. schools hover around and is needed for herd immunity, which protects those who haven’t been vaccinated for medical reasons or because they are too young. The majority of Vashon parents say yes to some vaccines, particularly the tetanus shot for their kids who play outside on the forested island. But many still buck the formal schedule of shots recommended by health officials. They may select some but not all and space them out over a longer period of time. Nicky Wilks, who grew up on Vashon and has three young children, said the changing attitude has led some pro-vaccine parents to exclude from gatherings kids who may not have their shots, while teenagers openly mock those who aren’t vaccinated. “That’s the worst-case scenario, when we are creating physical barriers in our community,” Wilks said. He said he isn’t against all vaccines but doesn’t agree that dozens of shots starting at birth are necessary despite health officials’ insistence. Wilks declined to say if his family is fully immunized. Gator Lanphear says he’s “very judgmental” about parents who don’t vaccinate. He said he not only immunizes his twin 6-year-old daughters but instills in them the importance of getting their shots as a heroic act. “They understand that what they did benefits humankind. Yeah, they got their ice cream for it, but they’re also eradicating polio,” Lanphear said. The number of philosophical exemptions in Vashon has decreased dramatically, but there are still 11.6 percent of students whose families elect not to vaccinate. That’s five times higher than the national median rate. Still, Vashon’s progress can’t be discounted because it’s unusual for immunization to increase so steeply in a few short years when there is deep-rooted anti-vaccine sentiment in the community, said William John Moss, an epidemiology professor at Johns Hopkins University. “That’s an important increase, but they still have a ways to go,” Moss said. “That’s a vaccination rate lower than in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa.” Day, the school nurse, has worked closely with the new Neighborcare Health clinics, the single largest medical provider on the island. Together, they aggressively remind families when they’re due for vaccines and counsel them on their concerns, whether rooted in scientific evidence or not. “The message is really getting through. I feel like the tide is really turning on the island,” Day said. A two-year-old health center at the high school has been especially successful. It’s partly funded by a county grant that helps cover free shots and services for low-income or uninsured students. About half of the school system’s 1,615 students are registered patients and an additional 43 children who are in private school or homeschooled also use the clinic. Manager Stephanie Keller said the center has received a spike in calls from concerned parents amid a measles outbreak in Washington state that’s affected at least 78 people, including seven reported near Vashon. As of May 17, 880 people have contracted measles in 24 states this year, according to the Centers for Disease Control. The outbreak prompted Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to declare a state of emergency and sign a law that eliminates personal or philosophical exemptions for the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine that’s needed before attending a day care center or school. Parents, however, can still claim a medical or religious exemption. Some critics say the Vashon school system’s data isn’t representative of the population because the island is home to many families who live off the grid. Vaccine advocates argue it’s an important benchmark because numbers from a previous islandwide survey aligned with public school data. And there are other signs, too. The top service provided at the student-based health center is vaccinations, Keller said. “That surprised us,” Keller said. “You think of Vashon as being this hippie place where nobody vaccinates.” ___ Follow Sally Ho on Twitter: https://twitter.com/_SallyHo .


Health officials disclose another romaine outbreak, now over.

Explanation: U.S. health officials disclosed another food poisoning outbreak linked to romaine lettuce, but they said it appears to be over.

Health, Food poisoning, General News, U.S. News, Poisoning

The disclosure late Thursday comes after the produce industry said it was stepping up safety measures following a series of outbreaks , including one last year that sickened more than 200 people and killed five. It’s not clear why romaine keeps sickening people, but experts note the difficulty of eliminating risk posed by raw vegetables grown in open fields. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said 23 people were sickened between July 12 and Sept. 8. No deaths were reported. As with previous outbreaks, the agency said it was unable to determine how the romaine became contaminated. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said by Sept. 19 leafy greens were suspected for the cluster of E. coli illnesses, and that romaine was determined as the likely source Oct. 2. The FDA, which overseas produce safety, said its data indicated the tainted produce was no longer on shelves by the time romaine was identified as the likely culprit. It said the situation didn’t warrant immediate public communication. The spring 2018 outbreak that sickened more than 200 people was traced to Yuma, Arizona, one of two regions that grow most the country’s romaine. A massive cattle feedlot in the area was identified as a potential contamination source. Months later, just before Thanksgiving, the FDA warned people to avoid romaine because of another E. coli outbreak. That was traced to central California, the other key region where romaine is grown. Produce groups in the two states have said growers tightened safety measures. The FDA is partnering with scientists to study how romaine may have become tainted. Separately, the CDC said Friday it’s investigating a multistate outbreak of salmonella infections linked to ground beef that are more severe than expected. Eight of 10 infected people were hospitalized, including one death. It said it has not identified a single, common supplier, and it reminded people to cook ground beef thoroughly. ___ 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: Rick Scott, former healthcare CEO, defends Columbia/HCA's record

Health Care, Message Machine 2010, Florida, Rick Scott,

Even when condensed to two paragraphs, you can see the potential land mines Rick Scott, a Republican running for governor, might face over his former hospital chain, Columbia/HCA.Paragraph 1. Scott grew Columbia/HCA into the nation's biggest hospital system. It then became the center of a multi-state federal investigation in 1997 that centered around whether Columbia/HCA defrauded Medicare and Medicaid. Scott resigned under pressure in 1997 as the scope of the investigation grew.Paragraph 2. Columbia/HCA eventually settled the fraud cases, paying a record-setting $1.7 billion in fines. The company pleaded guilty to at least 14 corporate felonies. Four people also were indicted; two were convicted, but those convictions were overturned on appeal. Scott himself was not indicted or questioned in the case.Largest fine ever. $1.7 billion. Resigned under pressure.A third-party group, the Alliance for America’s Future, has crafted a 30-second ad attacking Scott's record at Columbia/HCA. And there's a baiting Twitter account, ScottFraudFiles, being pushed by supporters of Bill McCollum, Scott's Republican primary rival.The attacks are being countered by Scott, who has deep pockets and already has spent millions of dollars on television advertisements.Scott launched a website, www.truthaboutrickscott.com, to refute claims about his time leading Columbia/HCA. He also is up with a new television ad called "Truth," where Scott challenges McCollum on the Columbia/HCA story. Looking directly into the camera, here's what Scott says: Bill McCollum’s been in politics for 30 years. You’d think he’d want to talk about his record. Instead he’s just attacking me. That’s what career politicians do.I’m going to do something the politicians never will, give you the unvarnished truth.The McCollum crowd says the hospital company I started was fined by the government for Medicare fraud.Unfortunately, that’s true.I wasn’t ever charged or even questioned by the authorities, but that’s not what matters. What matters is that the company made mistakes. And as CEO I take responsibility and I learned from it.Now here’s the part McCollum leaves out:Two-thirds of the top-rated hospitals in Florida were our hospitals.Our hospitals earned the highest quality rating, 4 times the national average.We had the best care at the lowest prices for our patients.If you want a career politician, go with McCollum…But if you want someone who learns, leads, and demands accountability … I’m Rick Scott, let’s get to work. Since this is a Florida campaign, we decided to check Scott's claim that two-thirds of the top-rated hospitals in Florida were owned by Columbia/HCA. (First, a note. We love seeing fact-check journalism and noticed that Michael Putney of WPLG in Miami dissected the Alliance for America’s Future ad and, to a lesser extent, Scott's rebuttal that we're analyzing here. We think you should check out his report. It starts about 35 seconds in. )Scott's campaign said the claim about Columbia/HCA's Florida hospitals comes from a December 1995 article in a health care trade publication, Modern Healthcare.The article references a 1994 study of America's hospital system. The study, performed by Health Care Investment Analysts and William Mercer, rates hospitals in terms of cost efficiency and patient outcomes -- measuring mortality rates, length of stays for patients, the number of employees needed to treat a patient, occupancy rates and financial performance.HCIA and and William Mercer then create a list of the nation's Top 100 hospitals. The list is subdivided by the type of hospital -- rural, urban, teaching hospital, etc. "Of the 17 hospitals from Florida in the top 100, 12 are in one category: nonteaching hospitals of more than 250 beds. All are Columbia hospitals," the Modern Healthcare article says.The article mentions that one of the 12 was purchased by Columbia/HCA after the study was performed, so really it's 11 out of 17. That's 65 percent, or right around what Scott mentioned in his ad.We checked subsequent years of the study and found similar results.In 1995, the same study rated 13 Florida hospitals among the Top 100. Nine of those hospitals were Columbia/HCA properties, or 69 percent.Twelve of 17 Top 100 Florida hospitals (70.5 percent) were run by Columbia/HCA in 1996, according to the same study.That's all right in line with what Scott said, but it fails to account for those big land mines we mentioned earlier.If the study measures financial performance, for instance, did Columbia/HCA hospitals rank artificially because it defrauded Medicare and Medicaid?We turned to one of the authors of the study, Jean Chenoweth, to find out. Chenoweth now works for Thomson Reuters, which continues to publish the annual hospital survey.We asked: Had you and the study group known about Columbia/HCA's Medicare fraud investigation -- would that have affected the rankings?She said: "We can’t give a definitive answer to a hypothetical question. Our policy calls for us to rescind any 100 Top Hospital Award found to have been given on the basis of inaccurate data. Columbia/HCA settled its case, so we have no proof or admission that specific data that led to a specific hospital receiving a 100 Top Hospital Award was inaccurate. That makes this difficult to answer definitively. "Chenoweth's answer muddies things a bit in our minds.Because the corporate fraud charges were settled, there never was a public airing of the specific allegations. And because there was never a public airing of the specific allegations -- and a finding of guilt -- the study authors were unable to see if the figures they measured were deemed fraudulent. It's also important to note that the study was focused on the outcomes of individual hospitals while the federal investigation centered around dozens of Columbia/HCA properties.Where does this leave us?In his ad "Truth," Scott certainly cites the Top 100 hospital report correctly when he says that two-thirds of the Florida hospitals to make the list were owned by Columbia/HCA. But he glosses over the fact that those rankings could at least be questioned because fraud-laden data may have been used in the analysis to make the rating.The author of the study doesn't know if the data was accurate or cooked, because the fraud case never went to trial.We found no evidence to say the rankings are bogus, but we think the claim could use a little additional information. To us, that correlates to a rating of .


A polio vaccination campaign headed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in India led to 47,500 cases of paralysis.

Explanation: Bill and Melinda Gates’ Polio Efforts Led to 47,500 Kids Being Paralyzed

Bill and Melinda Gates’ polio vaccination efforts in India have not paralyzed 47,500 children. The eRumor surfaced in 2013 when the website Nsnbc International published a  report that claimed Bill and Melinda Gates hired Bollywood actors to encourage Indians to take an oral polo vaccine in a campaign that went horribly wrong: “Polio is a terrible disease that kills many and paralyzes others. Fifty years ago it was widespread around the world. When you talk to people who remember polio in the United States, they’ll tell you about the fear and panic during an outbreak and describe grim hospital wards full of children in iron lungs that maintained their breathing. At its peak in the United States in 1952, polio paralyzed or killed more than 24,000 people. “But in 2011 alone, the Bill and Melinda Gates’ polio vaccine campaign in India caused 47,500 cases of paralysis and death.” The report goes on to claim that the CDC had “dropped the oral polio vaccine from its vaccine schedule in the U.S. because it was causing polio,” which is true. The oral polio vaccine (OPV) has not been used in the U.S. since 2000. The CDC  said the risk of paralysis, which effects one out of every 2.4 million children, was too high: “To eliminate the risk of VAPP, as of January 1, 2000, OPV was no longer recommended for routine immunization in the United States. However, OPV continues to be used in the countries where polio is endemic or the risk of importation and transmission is high. OPV is recommended for global polio eradication activities in polio-endemic countries due to its advantages over IPV in providing intestinal immunity and providing secondary spread of the vaccine to unprotected contacts.” The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation  said that it contributes technical and financial recourses to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) to support things like targeted vaccination campaigns, community mobilization and stronger routine immunization efforts: “A cornerstone of the GPEI polio eradication strategy is the goal of reaching all children in the first year of life in the highest-risk countries with multiple doses of OPV, through both national and local vaccination campaigns. Efforts include door-to-door immunization in areas where poliovirus is known or suspected to be circulating, as well as in areas at risk of re-importation, with limited access to healthcare, high population density and mobility, poor sanitation, and low routine immunization coverage… “OPV, the polio vaccine used in most of the developing world, is safe, effective, easy to administer, and inexpensive. But OPV consists of live, weakened viruses, which in very rare cases — 1 in every 2.7 million first doses of the vaccine — can cause paralysis. In settings with very low OPV coverage, OPV vaccine viruses can also mutate and begin to circulate in the population, just like wild polioviruses.” But the eRumor’s central claim — that Bill and Melinda Gates’ polio efforts caused “47,500 cases of paralysis death” — is false. It’s based on an  editorial in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics. The editorial said 47,500 new cases of non-polio AFP reported in India in 2011 was “directly proportional” to doses of OPV administered there. The statistic was used to argue the larger point that donor funded “disease-specific” projects should be dropped in favor of community-oriented primary health care programs. But research doesn’t support the editorial’s claims. Researchers from the Indian Institute of Science and the World Health Organization launched a  study on the rise of AFP cases in India, and found that a number of factors contributed to it. First, the definition of AFP had been broadened so that weakness and paralysis that result from non-polio viruses now fall under the AFP definition, which led to many more cases being reported. A second factor is that with polio nearly eradicated in India, screenings for non-polio viruses that cause AFP have spiked dramatically, which means that more cases have been identified. According to the study: “This large increase in non-polio AFP cases, which represent AFP cases caused by agents other than poliovirus, probably reflects the excellent implementation of the expanded definition of AFP and highly sensitive surveillance and detection methods used by NPSP in India from 2005 onwards, in contrast to the other polio-endemic countries, i.e., Pakistan, Nigeria, and Afghanistan, where the expanded AFP surveillance is not in place. The large increase in the non-polio AFP rate from 1.45 and 1.97 per 100,000 children during 1998–2003 to 16.20 in 2011 further reflects the excellent operational performance of the expanded AFP surveillance in India.”  Comments


A meme accurately describes 'The Nancy Pelosi Crime Family.'

Explanation: A 2015 Politico article reported Pelosi’s net worth at around $30 million.

An image graphic supposedly documenting the various misdeeds of the “Pelosi Crime Family” — including perjury, securities fraud, and simply being rich — was circulated on social media in January 2019. We’ve examined each of the accusations leveled within against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, her husband, her father, her brother, and her son individually and found them to be largely  overstated, misrepresented, or based on unreliable information:   Was Nancy Pelosi’s father, Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr., a constant companion of Benjamin “Benny Tratta” Magliano? Status: UNPROVEN The facts: This claim is a verbatim reproduction of the introductory paragraph of a June 2015 blog post published on the Typepad blog “Bitterqueen” by Phillip Crawford, Jr., the author of the 2015 book The Mafia and the Gay, which was reportedly based on FBI files obtained pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Crawford wrote that Peter Galiano, a boxer who was caught up in a draft-dodging scheme in the 1940s, told federal agents in 1947 that D’Alesandro was a “constant companion” of the Boston mobster. When the FBI examined these associations in 1961, however, before D’Alesandro received a presidential appointment to the Federal Renegotiation Board, Galiano said that his statements were based on rumor and hearsay and that he couldn’t recall where he had come across that information:  1947: Peter C. Galiano, Baltimore, Maryland, advised that Thomas D’Alesandro was a constant companion of John Cataneo, Benjamin Magliano, also known as Benny Trotta, and [redacted], who were described as “local big-time gamblers.” Mr. Galiano stated that these individuals had worked hard for Thomas D’Alesandro’s re-election to Congress and in his campaign at that time to become Mayor of Baltimore. Peter C. Galiano, Baltimore, Maryland, advised during the current investigation that his previous statements were based only on rumor and hearsay. He stated that he could not recall who gave him this information or whether or not there was any truth to the allegations. He further explained that he was never well acquainted with any of the men he had mentioned and had no personal knowledge of their affairs. Galiano wasn’t the only person to accuse D’Alesandro of having ties to the Boston mob, but those allegations were never officially corroborated and they never resulted in any charges being brought against D’Alesandro. In fact, D’Alesandro was appointed to the Federal Renegotiation Board by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 despite an FBI investigation into those alleged associations. Does Nancy Pelosi own Goat Hill Pizza, a restaurant suspected of harboring trafficking? Status: FALSE The Facts: Nancy Pelosi does not own a pizza parlor, and Goat Hill Pizza is not suspected of harboring child trafficking by any law enforcement agencies. This claim first started circulating in 2016 as part of a larger nonsensical and repeatedly debunked conspiracy theory known as “Pizzagate,” in which online trolls asserted that innocuous words such as “pizza” and “cheese” were actually code words referring to child sex trafficking. Although this conspiracy theory was largely focused on the Washington, D.C,. pizza parlor “Comet Ping Pong,” Pelosi was also accused of running her own pedophilia ring back in San Francisco out of Goat Hill Pizza. Why? Because a single document from 2004 listed “Philip@GoatHill.com” as the email address for Nancy Pelosi. While conspiracy theorists may contend that this tidbit of information is somehow proof that a high-profile politician was running a pedophilia ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor, a much more plausible (and far less sensational) explanation is evident: it was a filing error. Philip DeAndrade co-founded Goat Hill Pizza in the 1970s, but by 1987 he was working on Nancy Pelosi’s staff. It’s likely that DeAndrade accidentally put his own email address, instead of Pelosi’s, into a form. Regardless, one spurious appearance of an email address can in no way be construed as proof that Pelosi owns a pizza parlor. Furthermore, the only persons who have suspected this pizza parlor of facilitating child trafficking are online conspiracy theorists and not genuine law enforcement agencies. Did Nancy Pelosi hold a secret fundraiser for Islamist and Hamas-linked groups? Status: MIXTURE The Facts: Despite the wording suggesting that Pelosi hosted a “secret fundraiser” to for Islamist- and Hamas-linked groups, this claim refers to a fundraiser held for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The “Islamist and Hamas-linked groups” portion of the claim is largely based on the fact that Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), attended the fundraiser. A number of other Muslim groups were also reportedly in attendance at the fundraiser, along with Keith Ellison, the first Muslim to be elected to the U.S. Congress. The Daily Caller was among the first to draw attention to Awad’s attendance at this fundraiser:  Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi headlined a high-dollar fundraiser in May that was attended by U.S.-based Islamist groups and individuals linked by the U.S. government to the Hamas jihad group and to the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood movement. The donors at the undisclosed May 16 event included Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, according to data provided by the nonpartisan Investigative Project on Terrorism. The CAIR group was named an unindicted conspirator in a 2007 trial of a Hamas money-smuggling group. While it’s true that CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator during the 2007 case of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), an Islamic charity eventually convicted of funding Islamic militant groups, CAIR was not charged with any criminal activity in connection with that case. Furthermore, CAIR was one of nearly 250 organizations who were given the “unindicted co-conspirator” label during the HLF case:  CAIR is an aggressive Muslim civil liberties organization, modeled on the Anti Defamation League, that has made it a target for criticism. It was indeed named as an “unindicted co-conspirator or joint venturer” in the Holy Land Foundation case — an Islamic charity that in 2008 was convicted of funding Islamic militant groups. But CAIR was not alone in that designation; nearly 250 other organizations and individuals were also named. The federal government said the organizations were included on the list in order to produce evidence at the trial, but the district court and a federal appeals court later ruled that it had been a mistake to make the list public. The New York Times also reported that “unindicted co-conspirators” on this list were not charged with any crimes:  Technically, the prosecution can introduce statements made by any individual or organization named as an unindicted co-conspirator without such statements being dismissed as hearsay. Those on the list have not been charged with anything, but they are concerned that the label of unindicted co-conspirator will forever taint them, particularly if the Holy Land group is convicted, and that they will have no legal recourse. CAIR, of course, also denied having links to any terrorist organizations. So Pelosi and other Democrats held a Democratic fundraiser in 2012 that was attended by a number of leaders from various Muslim groups. While some critics may label groups such as CAIR as “Hamas-linked,” that label is disputed. Was Nancy Pelosi’s son, Paul Pelosi, Jr., charged with securities fraud? Status: MOSTLY FALSE The Facts: In July 2014, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced they were bringing fraud charges against four individuals involved with the company Natural Blue Resources Inc. Although Paul Pelosi, Jr. did work for that company, he was not one of the individuals charged with securities fraud by the SEC, who didn’t even mention Pelosi Jr.’s name when they first announced the charges:  The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced fraud charges against four individuals and a microcap company for concealing from investors that two lawbreakers ran the company. According to the SEC’s orders instituting administrative proceedings, the mission of Natural Blue Resources Inc. was to create, acquire, or otherwise invest in environmentally-friendly companies, including an initiative to locate, purify, and sell water recovered from underground aquifers in New Mexico and other areas with depleting water resources. What investors didn’t know was that two individuals with prior law violations — James E. Cohen and Joseph Corazzi — secretly controlled the operational and management decisions of Natural Blue while calling themselves outside “consultants.” This arrangement enabled them to be de facto officers of Natural Blue and personally profit from the company without disclosing their past brushes with the law to investors. Cohen, who lives in Windermere, Fla., was previously incarcerated for financial fraud. Corazzi, who resides in Albuquerque, N.M., was previously charged with violating federal securities laws and permanently barred from acting as an officer or director of a public company … The other two individuals charged in the case are Toney Anaya and Erik Perry, who were former chief executive officers at Natural Blue. The SEC’s orders find that they misled investors by failing to disclose that Cohen and Corazzi were running the company in spite of their criminal or disciplinary histories. Subsequent SEC filings listed Paul Pelosi, Jr. as President and Board member of Natural Blue from 24 August 2009 to 10 January 2010. So Nancy Pelosi’s son was involved with a company that was charged with securities fraud years later, he was never personally charged with a crime. Was Nancy Pelosi’s brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D’Alesandro, charged with lying during a rape trial? Status: MIXTURE The Facts: Nancy Pelosi’s brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D’Alesandro, was charged with perjury during a rape trial in the 1950s. However, he was eventually acquitted of those charges. In 1953, D’Alesandro and 13 other youths went on trial in Baltimore for “moral charges” involving two young girls, aged 11 and 14. D’Alesandro, who was 20 at the time and was charged with statutory rape, testified that he had never seen the victims before. Although he was eventually acquitted of the rape charges (he was the only defendant to be acquitted during the trials), he was later charged with perjury. The Denton Journal reported at the time that “The perjury charge resulted from that trial. The state contended D’Alesandro lied in denying he had ever seen the girls before, or had been in a car with three other youths who testified at their trials he was with them.” Just as with the rape charges, however, D’Alesandro was eventually acquitted of the perjury charges:  A jury of four women and eight men deliberated 6 hour and 16 minutes here last night before acquitting Franklin Roosevelt D’Alesandro, 21-year-old son of Baltimore’s mayor, of a perjury charge. The “not guilty” verdict, delivered in a loud voice by Mrs. Stella B. Hughes, jury foreman, to a tension-taught crowd in Wicomico County Circuit Court, ended a 5-day trial. Young D’Alesandro, calm and poised throughout the long hours of testimony and argument and seemingly endless wait on the verdict, was jubilant when he heard the decision. After receiving a kiss on the hand from his fiancee and hugs and kisses from his crying mother, D’Alesandro planted a kiss on the cheek of Joseph Sherbow, former Baltimore Circuit Court judge, who headed the defense staff. It was Sherbow who successfully defended young D’Alesandro on a statutory rape charge in Baltimore last November when he was the only one of 16 defendents to be acquitted in a series of morals trials resulting from sex charges brought by two young girl cousins .. “In order to acquit this defendant,” Asst. State’s Atty. J Harold Grady said. “You must be convinced these eight witness who appeared before you entered into a conspiracy and made up their story out of whole cloth.” The defense countered that the only evidence of contraindications came from a “parade of trash.” Chief witness for the defense Mary Ann Jankowski, 20-year-old petite blonde fiancee of the defendant. She testified that at the time of the alleged sex offenses last July, young D’Alessandro spent every evening with her and her parents. Although it’s possible that D’Alessandro’s political power had something to do with his acquittal (whether directly or indirectly), the fact of the matter is that he was found not guilty of any crimes. Nancy Pelosi’s husband Paul has a net worth of over $200 million? Status: UNPROVEN The Facts: Nancy Pelosi’s husband Paul is indeed a successful businessman and investor, but the claim that he has a net worth of $202 million (which has nothing to do with criminal activity) appears to be based on a misreading of a 2015 article published by the National Review. The conservative publication reported at the time that Pelosi (not specifically her husband) listed assets worth between $43.4 million and $202 million on her 2014 financial disclosure forms: Though financial-disclosure forms list only ranges of assets and liabilities, Pelosi listed between $42.4 million and $199.5 million in assets in 2013, which was enough for Bloomberg Business to deem her the richest member of House leadership from either party. By 2014, she and her husband, investment banker Paul Pelosi, were doing even better: She reported between $43.4 million and $202 million in assets. The “Pelosi Crime Family” meme refers to the highest possible figure within a very broad range and incorrectly refers to this number as Pelosi’s net worth. However, the figure actually states the estimated value of Pelosi’s assets and doesn’t offset it with other financial aspects such as debt:  [T]he financial disclosures don’t just show substantial assets — the Pelosis have gone into lots of debt, too. Pelosi and her husband are currently paying mortgages on seven properties, totaling between approximately $9.8 million and $46.5 million in 2014, likely accruing big tax savings in the process. The couple also opened home-equity lines of credit on four of these properties, adding between approximately $1.7 million and $6.5 million to their liabilities.


Death toll from acute encephalitis in east Indian town rises to 129 children.

Explanation: At least 129 children have now died of Acute Encephalitis Syndrome (AES) in the town of Muzaffarpur in the eastern Indian state of Bihar since an outbreak earlier this month, a medical official said on Sunday.

The death toll from AES, a fever that affects the central nervous system, has risen from 97 reported last Monday and medical and government officials are facing mounting criticism for struggling to contain the crisis in the town of nearly 350,000 people. AES, known as ‘brain fever’ is caused by any one of a number of viruses. Symptoms include high fever, vomiting and, in severe cases, seizures, paralysis and coma. Infants and elderly people are particularly vulnerable. “I received my last update in the afternoon and according to the latest report that I have, 129 children have died so far,” Shailesh Prasad Singh, the top state medical official in Muzaffarpur told Reuters by phone. The town lies about 80 km (50 miles) from Patna, the state capital. The precise causes of AES are not known, though a majority of medical professionals say it is linked to a ferocious heat-wave. Some studies have blamed toxins in lychees, a fruit grown in abundance in orchards around Muzaffarpur. But many families told Reuters last week that their children had not eaten them in recent weeks. Singh said a team of experts, including doctors, paramedics and other government officials were working “round the clock” to contain the spread of AES, which killed more than 350 children in a previous outbreak in Bihar in 2014. Doctors from other parts of the country had been dispatched to Muzaffarpur to help staff at the Sri Krishna Medical College Hospital which had to evict a group of sick inmates from a ward to accommodate the surge in AES patients. Most of the children who died were being treated at the hospital. Nearly half of all children in Muzaffarpur are underweight, and a similar number are stunted, making them vulnerable to AES, which grips the town almost every year when summer temperatures surge. As the death toll mounts, both the Bihar and the federal governments have come under criticism for their inability to save children, and doctors and government officials have faced angry protests. On Sunday, the Bihar government suspended a doctor in Muzaffarpur for dereliction of duties, news agency ANI, a Reuters affiliate, said. India’s Federal Health and Family Welfare Minister Harsh Vardhan, who is himself a doctor, said last week that health officials have finalised plans for construction of a 100-bed pediatric intensive care unit in Muzaffarpur, but gave no timeframe for when it would be built.


Drinking untreated spring water, marketed as "raw water," provides health benefits because they are "probiotic.

Explanation: Ultimately, the probiotic claims of Live Water (and those made by other similar companies) are based on wholesale misreadings of scientific papers and principles that, even if interpreted correctly, would offer no relevance to — let alone proof of — raw water’s probiotic potential.

Medical, alternative health, bottled water, health fad

According to a 29 December 2017 story in the New York Times, Silicon Valley is going all-in on “off-the-grid” water — marketed as an untainted, healthier alternative to bottled or tap water. There’s a growing movement to drink what some people are calling “raw water,” and some companies are capitalizing by selling untreated spring water at a considerable markup at health food stores on the West Coast. Raw water proponents either buy this water or find their own natural spring water for drinking. The health risks inherent to either form of untreated water — cholera, E. coli, hepatitis, and giardia, just to name a few — have been well covered. Without sterilization procedures, there is no guarantee the water does not contain pathogens, either from the water source or introduced during the collection and bottling process. But what about the argument that, despite these health risks, there is some inherent benefit to drinking unpurified water? When intelligible, the rationalizations boil down (not literally, of course) to a collection of health aphorisms with no demonstrable relationship to untreated spring water. As a case study, we will focus on the raw water purveyor Live Water, whose arguments echo those of similar companies. Live Water, a company that has undergone a variety of name changes since its founding as “Fountain of Truth Spring Water” in 2015, is run by a man who changed his own name to Mukhande Singh from Christopher Sanborn after getting into the raw water business. According to Singh, the primary benefit imparted by his water, which he told the Times “stays most fresh within one lunar cycle of delivery,” is beneficial bacteria that would have otherwise been removed during the sterilization process. His company’s web site reads: Living spring water is the key to unlocking a perfect micro-biome balance. The probiotics listed [in this analysis of our water] are exclusive to our unsterilized water. […] They are imperative for optimal physical and mental health. Without these probiotics we’re not able to fully assimilate all the nutrients in our food. Some beneficial bacteria are also proven to have abilities to transform harmful bacteria. Here is a published medical report supporting evidence that raw spring water has vast healing abilities. The density of scientific errors contained in this statement is considerable. Below, we will pick apart the primary misrepresentations contained within, along with the report that Singh links to: The “Perfect Micro-biome Balance” Singh first alludes to established and well-accepted science on the myriad links between gut microbiome and overall human health, falsely suggesting that because his water contains bacteria (apparently any old bacteria), it too will impart benefits. In fact, there are very specific criteria for what makes a bacterial strain viable as a dietary probiotic. Aside from not causing harm to a human, legitimate probiotics have to be able to survive the environmental conditions of the stomach and to consume material present in the stomach, among many other requirements. Even within commonly used probiotic strains like Lactobacillus, the number of species within that single classification which can actually work as a probiotic is low. A 2008 study isolated 567 lactobacilli strains from healthy human fecal samples and screened them for their probiotic potential. Only 36 of those nearly 600 strains made the cut. In other words, without knowing what bacteria specifically are present in a “raw water” sample, claims of its probiotic nature are baseless. The Bacteria in Raw Water “Are Imperative for Optimal Physical and Mental Health” Laudably, Singh provides the results of chemical and biological safety testing performed on his water, which includes a readout of the viable strains of bacteria cultured from a sample. Unfortunately, the strains identified (hailed as “recently discovered probiotics”) are are by no means exclusive to his product nor are they “imperative for optimal physical and mental health.”  The bacterial flora of Live Water belong to two somewhat obscure but closely related genera: Pseudomonas and Acidovorax. Found in soil, they are not known to impart any human health benefits, and are not listed in any studies as potential candidates for human probiotics. One major reason is that they do not consume the carbohydrates that might be found in the human intestinal tract. Instead, they consume dangerous organics such as solvents and dyes. Pseudomonas oleovorans, the most common bacterial strain in Live Water, is known primarily for its ability to degrade the triarylmethane dye malachite green. Pseudomonas putida, also found in Live Water, can be helpful as an environmental tool because it can break down the harmful solvent toluene. There is no evidence to support the claim that these play a role in “assimilating nutrients,” because — among many other reasons — toluene and triarylmethane are not nutrients. Given that most viable probiotics are harvested from human sources and not from pristine aquifers, it is unlikely that other springs used as raw water sources would provide useful probiotics. Some Bacteria “Are Also Proven to Have Abilities to Transform Harmful Bacteria” Singh alleges that certain “beneficial bacteria” can “transform harmful bacteria” into something benign. As evidence, he links to the Wikipedia page for “Phage therapy” which uses viruses called bacteriophages (not “beneficial bacteria”) to kill harmful bacteria. While some work suggests a potential role for some specific bacteriophages to affect some specific infectious bacteria, its inclusion on the Live Water website is an absolute non-sequitur because Singh provides no evidence that any bacteriophage is in his product. Bottom line: It’s not 100% clear what Singh is talking about here, but he appears to have confused bacteria with bacteriophage — an unforced error, given the wholescale irrelevance of phage therapy to his raw spring water. “A Published Medical Report Proving Raw Spring Water Has Vast Healing Abilities” Finally, Singh links to a single scientific study as evidence to support his claim that raw water has “vast healing abilities.” The linked study speculated that a single mineral spring’s ability to heal skin wounds (topically, not by drinking it) might possibly be aided by the bacteria present. (None of the bacteria in that spring was identified in Live Water). In other words, the one (preliminary) scientific study Singh actually cites is about the healing properties of soaking in a specific spring in Italy, not about drinking spring water. It is, like many other statements made on Live Water’s website, irrelevant to the issue at hand.