Pope Francis uses a modest compact car to get around, while Creflo Dollar drives an expensive sports car.

The image that showed up the PolitiFact Georgia inbox had already pinged wildly around social media. The top part showed the Pope waving from the back seat of the small four-door Fiat 500L. Below it was a photo of a driver purported to be College Park megachurch pastor Creflo Dollar, tooling in a shiny silver roadster with an EU license plate. The reader wondered, could that actually be the lead pastor of World Changers Church International behind those sunglasses, zipping along somewhere in Europe? We wondered too, and decided to do some digging. Breaking down the rides That the top part of the meme was accurate was clear from news coverage, and the social media response, during Pope Francis’ recent visit to the United States. The Pope made news for what he said but also for his use of the Italian-made subcompact car. News reports said Vatican police, not the Holy See, selected the car, which has a starting list price of $19,935. But they did so on Francis’ specific request of modesty and simplicity for his ride. Determining who was behind the wheel in the roadster proved more of a challenge. Dollar is a recognizable face who has made his own headlines, most recently from a fundraising video to help his ministry buy a $65 million Gulfstream G650 luxury jet. Though the church removed the video after a backlash, the church’s board of directors later said it still intended to replace Dollar’s jet with the Holy Grail of luxury jets. "We plan to acquire a Gulfstream G650 because it is the best, and it is a reflection of the level of excellence at which this organization chooses to operate," the directors said in a prepared statement. So, the idea of Dollar photographed in a sports car didn’t seem all that outlandish. But with the shades covering much of the driver’s face, it was hard to tell just who was behind the wheel. Focusing on the car, though, brought the navigator into much clearer view. We sent the image to Jim Donnelly and Tom Comerro, the senior editor and editorial assistant, respectively at Hemmings Motor News. The official word from the bible for car collectors: the silver roadster is a Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, Stirling Moss edition. Only 75 of the vehicles were produced, with a starting list price in 2009 of 750,000 Euros, or north of $1 million for a supercharged ride that could reach 217 miles per hour with no windshield. Searching for who has access to that ride led us to a similar picture, of a different angle and a driver with the sunglasses off. That’s not a reverend driving the $1 million car. The driver is rapper Kanye West, whose nickname Yeezus is a clear play on the name for the son of God, arriving at a gala in Cannes, France. (You can see a more clear photo of Kanye as the driver here). Modesty and prosperity Simply put, the image itself is flat-out wrong. And what about the context of those 1,000 words the picture is trying to say? Much has been made of the "simplicity" sought by Pope Francis ever since he took a vow of poverty as a Jesuit priest. He took the subway as a cardinal in Argentina and news reports say he humbles himself in either a Ford Focus or a 1984 Renault when getting around the Vatican. Dollar, meanwhile, is well-known for preaching the "prosperity gospel," which says that God wants all believers to do well in all aspects of their lives, including finances. Dollar listed two Rolls Royces – one paid for by his congregation and another by members of his ministerial association of those pastors he has trained – in a 2007 congressional inquiry into the tax-exempt status of a handful of such megachurches. World Changers spokesman Vic Bolton said Dollar no longer uses those $250,000 automobiles and instead drivers a regular Mercedes Benz S-Class sedan (which new lists for $96,000) that’s about 8-10 years old (in the $65,000 range). "It’s a nice car, but it’s no Aston Martin," Bolton said. "I don’t think he drives a Mercedes to send a message. He drives a nice car because that’s what he wants. True prosperity is having options." The same could be said about Pope Francis. The Catholic Church, too, is mum about its wealth. But a 2014 report found hundreds of millions of Euros tucked away, off the official church balance sheet. And the Vatican bank manages $7.3 billion in assets and keeps $20 million in gold reserves in the U.S. Federal Reserve. That is enough to buy and sell more than a few of those fancy roadsters. So the real difference – beyond the scale of wealth – is between the ideologies of those Christian faiths, said Kate Bowler, a professor of American Christianity at Duke Divinity School in North Carolina. The Catholic Church is heavily collective, with a focus on the church’s responsibility as a group. In the prosperity gospel, responsibility falls entirely to the right-believing individual. Often, the proof of that belief shows up in flashy cars or extravagant churches, such as the 8,500-seat World Changers dome that has become a landmark in College Park. But Bowler said the faith encourages family connections and community connections as truly prosperous, as well as focusing on sharing the gospel so that others may find that success. "It doesn’t really matter if it’s not true," Bowler said of the meme, "because it does capture the essence of a faith that requires proof of wealth to be true." That means Kanye West being confused for Creflo Dollar adds to, not diminishes, his message, she added. "I don’t think Creflo would mind at all," she said. "He’s a victor and that language of triumph and the wealthy car demonstrates to believers that God is with them." Our ruling A viral image making its way around social media purports to show Pope Francis getting around town in a small compact sedan, while Georgia’s megachurch pastor Creflo Dollar zips along in a stylish two-seater sports car. The roadster driver is actually rapper Kanye West, making the image clearly false. Even the context – trying to draw distinction between a supposedly humble servant of God with an apparently audacious one – ignores that both the Pope and Dollar have ready access to lavish luxuries.


Laser-Based Dermatological Procedures Could Be Revolutionized with New Techniqu

Explanation: This news release claims that a device being developed at the University of Missouri could revolutionize treatment to remove tattoos, birth marks and port-wine stains based only on a test on some pig skin…and that pig didn’t even have any tattoos or other markings. The release quotes a researcher who hopes “the procedure will be available widely in the near future.” But there’s no evidence to support that statement either. While the release is peppered with claims that this device that combines laser light with ultrasound pulses will be safer and more effective, that’s not what the experiment tested. The researchers showed only that their device was able to push more laser light through a piece of pig skin than a conventional laser. Their assumption that increasing transmitted optical power will improve clinical effectiveness has yet to be tested. Neither benefits nor harms are put in numerical context. Alternatives are not mentioned. We applaud the release writers for including a link to a patent application, which provides more detail about the device and highlights potential benefits to the researchers. The release notes that the work was funded by a program to support commercialization of academic research. There are objective statements about research results, and then there are marketing statements in support of a product. This research was supported by a University of Missouri’s FastTrack grant. According to the university’s web site, such grants “are not to be used for basic research, but to evaluate the commercial potential of existing research.” But when journalists and others receive a news release from University of Missouri Health they should be able to trust that academic standards hold more sway than marketing interests.

While it could be argued that the work on this combination laser-ultrasound device is at too early a stage to demand a comparison to the cost of existing laser devices, a quote in the release claims, “we’re hopeful that the procedure will be available widely in the near future,” which implies the developers must have some sense of how much their device might cost when they achieve their stated goal of commercialization. The release contains only vague claims about the technique being “extremely beneficial” and “safer, more controllable.” In fact, the researchers did not test either safety or clinical effectiveness in the experiment highlighted in the release, so it is premature to make claims of benefits. The release refers to “safety concerns” of existing laser devices, including eye damage, but there are no details about the level of risk presented by this new device. Oddly, the abstract of the conference presentation and the upcoming journal article in Lasers in Surgery and Medicine that were mentioned in the release both highlighted concerns about discoloring or burning skin, something not mentioned at all in the release. Note: The conference abstract was behind a paywall which requires a journal subscription. A draft of the accepted journal article was provided upon request, but we urge those who send out news releases to automatically include primary source material. The release says the researchers tested their device on “porcine skin tissue samples” and claims they saw promising initial results. However, the only result reported in the conference abstract and draft journal article is an increase in the amount of light that went through the pig skin in the lab, which the authors said “implies” reduced back-scatter or absorption in the skin. No results were reported about eye damage risk or skin heating, discoloration or burning. There was no mention in the conference abstract or journal article of any test tattoos or other skin marks on the pig skin, so there is no data presented about the actual ability of the device to remove the “birthmarks, port-wine stains, tattoos” headlining the release. The release doesn’t engage in disease mongering. It includes some context about how the new technology works. It seems clear from the release that this device is intended to be used on the same sort of patients who currently receive laser treatments to remove tattoos or other skin markings. We applaud the inclusion of a link to a patent application, which both highlights a potential benefit to the researchers and provides a great deal more detail about the device itself. The application states that the patent has been assigned to the University of Missouri, but it is reasonable to assume that commercialization of this device would benefit the careers of the researchers. The release says the research was funded by a University of Missouri program called FastTrack, which is intended to support the development and commercialization of technologies. Although the release does include claims that this experimental device is better than existing dermatological lasers, there are no details about how, or how much, better it might be. What’s more, the release fails to mention other methods, including applying glycerol or mechanical vibration to improve laser light transmission through skin. The draft journal article cites other research into using ultrasound, but this somewhat similar technique was not mentioned in the news release. The confusing mishmash of references to “open-air transmission” and sonoillumination is not useful to readers who don’t dig into the conference or patent application materials. Although the release is clear that the device is not yet available, there is no support for the claim that the device, which has yet to be tested on tattoos or other skin markings, “will be available widely in the near future,” especially since clinical trials have yet to be performed. The release mentions that lasers have been used to treat skin conditions for decades. However, it fails to note that other researchers have been looking into using ultrasound to improve laser light transmission for a number of years. Judging the release on this criterion is made harder by the muddled references to two distinct attributes of the device. The second paragraph of the release refers to reducing open-air transmission of laser light, and thus the risk of eye damage. But that statement is immediately followed by a quote about “sonoillumination.” This distinct component of the device uses ultrasound in an attempt to help the laser light pass through skin without heating it as much as conventional lasers, but that feature is explained only in the conference abstract and draft journal article. This burn risk, and how ultrasound might reduce it, is not mentioned in the release, which makes it very difficult for readers to understand just what is new about this device. The release is peppered with claims and quotes that are not supported by evidence. The headline claims that removal of birthmarks, port-wine stains and tattoos could be “revolutionized,” but the experiment did not include any testing of effectiveness on such skin markings. Claims of improved safety are also not supported by any data. Again, the experiment mentioned in the release, which was presented at a recent conference, reported results only on the optical transmission properties of pig skin samples; nothing about safety or clinical effectiveness.


A miscarriage is considered an abortion.

Explanation: State Sen. Eddie Lucio said a miscarriage is considered an abortion

State Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr., among supporters of a proposal requiring women seeking an abortion to first get a sonogram, made a dramatic statement in the floor debate before senators advanced the measure to the House. "There are literally millions of abortions going on each year in our own state," the Brownsville Democrat said Feb. 17, adding that he would "like to see the definition of abortion really be looked at. A miscarriage is considered an abortion, and I don’t think it should be considered an abortion because that’s a natural thing that unfortunately happens." After we sought more information from Lucio’s office, Lucio spoke again in the debate, saying: "A while ago I was speaking with numbers, I misspoke with my numbers." For other articles, we’ve confirmed that there have been about 50 million abortions nationally since the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade ruling and that 80,000 abortions took place Texas in 2008. As we started to check Lucio’s other floor statement — that a miscarriage is considered an abortion — Lucio told us in an e-mail statement that friends who lost a baby and underwent a procedure to remove the fetus from the womb told him their insurance company considered the  procedure an abortion. He said he didn’t intend to suggest that a miscarriage in itself should be considered an abortion. "I have strong beliefs about life," Lucio said. "In an effort to articulate my beliefs... I misspoke." We sought independent guidance on whether a miscarriage is considered an abortion. Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of State Health Services, told us miscarriages are sometimes referred to as "spontaneous abortions," though she said that the agency doesn’t include them in its annual abortion counts. No law requires the agency to track miscarriages, Williams said. "Unfortunately miscarriages are very common and often happen before a woman even knows she’s pregnant making complete and accurate data collection very difficult," she said. She cited the legal definition of abortion in Texas. According to the Texas Health and Safety Code, an abortion is "an act or procedure performed after pregnancy has been medically verified and with the intent to cause the termination of a pregnancy other than for the purpose of either the birth of a live fetus or removing a dead fetus." According to the Guttmacher Institute, which studies and advocates on issues related to reproductive health, 66 percent of 6.4 million pregnancies in 2008 resulted in live births and 19 percent ended in abortions. In Texas, 70 percent of 579,700 pregnancies were live births and 15 percent ended in abortions. An estimated 15 percent of pregnancies result in miscarriages, according to the institute. Rebecca Wind, an institute spokeswoman, told us that while "spontaneous abortion" is the medical term for an abortion, miscarriages aren’t included in abortion statistics and there is no national effort to track miscarriages. "In many cases, women who have miscarriages may not know they have had them," Wind said, because one can happen early in a pregnancy. Next, we contacted the Texas Medical Association, which represents 45,000 physicians and medical students. Spokeswoman Pam Udall confirmed that doctors usually call a miscarriage a spontaneous abortion because "the body itself is aborting the pregnancy," she said. "It is a natural consequence that affects up to one in four pregnancies." Udall pointed us to a 2002 pamphlet written by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which says "the loss of a pregnancy before 20 weeks is called early pregnancy loss. Often the loss is a miscarriage (sometimes called spontaneous abortion by doctors)." Where does that leave us? There’s truth in Lucio’s statement: In medical terms, a miscarriage is also termed a spontaneous abortion. Where the senator got off track was in conflating those natural occurrences with elective abortions — medical procedures that terminate a pregnancy. We rate his statement as .


New law would let Uruguayans grow marijuana at home, in clubs.

Explanation: Uruguayans will be able to grow marijuana at home or in clubs, but the state will be in charge of the trade from cultivation to sale under a government-led legalization bill presented in Congress on Wednesday.

The use of cannabis and other drugs is already legal in Uruguay, one of Latin America’s safest countries and a trailblazer on liberal lawmaking, but the sale and cultivation of drugs is not. President Jose Mujica, a former leftist guerrilla fighter, says the proposed law will help undermine smuggling gangs and fight petty crime in a region hit by drugs-related violence. Critics say it risks luring more Uruguayans to harder drugs. “The idea is to grant licenses for production, distribution, storage and for retail. We haven’t said whether that will be done by the private or public sector, the government will decide that,” said Sebastian Sabini, a ruling party lawmaker who heads a congressional committee on drugs and addiction. The bill, which the government hopes will become law early next year, says the state will be responsible for managing and regulating the marijuana trade from cultivation to distribution. Mujica’s allies control both houses of Congress so the bill is expected to pass despite resistance from opposition legislators. It would give Uruguay some of the world’s most permissive legislation on drugs. Households will be allowed to have up to six plants, or as much as 480 grams (about 17 ounces) of marijuana, the bill presented for discussion by the congressional committee showed. Cannabis consumers would be allowed to buy a maximum 40 grams each month under the bill, which also sets out regulations for smoking clubs with up to 15 members, 90 plants and annual production of up to 7.2 kilograms (15.8 pounds). A National Cannabis Institute would be created to control the drug’s production and distribution, impose sanctions on rule-breakers and design educational policies to warn about the risks of marijuana consumption. Some opponents have warned that Uruguay risks riling governments battling drug-related violence in the region, such as Colombia and Mexico, as well as the United States. President Barack Obama said earlier this year that legalizing drugs would not do away with violent cartels and “could be just as corrupting, if not more corrupting than the status quo.”


Chinese leukemia patient livestreams to pay for treatment.

Explanation: At least once a week, Su Lingmin films herself singing, sharing health tips and chatting with hundreds of fans from her hospital bed.

Beijing, Cancer, International News, Leukemia, Health, Business, China, Asia Pacific, Harbin

“Now I’m a professional livestreamer,” she said with a smile in a video last week. “What else can I do?” Diagnosed with leukemia four months ago, the 27-year-old native of the northern Chinese city of Harbin is helping give a human face to the struggle for more affordable cancer drugs in China. That cause has been bolstered by the popularity of a recent film, “Dying to Survive,” which follows the darkly comedic capers of a Chinese businessman-turned-drug smuggler who saves lives by illegally importing a leukemia drug from India, where it costs several times less than in China. Inspired by a true story, the movie has made more than $400 million since its release in early July, winning praise from moviegoers and critics and prompting government action. State news agency Xinhua reported last week that several provinces have lowered drug prices by up to 10 percent since the end of June. Most of the drugs targeted for price reductions are imported, like the Swiss-developed Gleevec medication in “Dying to Survive.” Beijing previously announced in May that cancer drugs would be exempt from import tariffs. Chinese labs are said to be designing equally effective drugs for a fraction of the price, Xinhua said. “Imported drugs are just too expensive,” said Du Yanan of the Beijing-based Heart to Heart foundation. Du runs a program that matches each yuan ($0.14) that leukemia patients spend on a form of Gleevec that costs 10,000 yuan ($1,474) for a single box of pills. Commenting on the discussions sparked by the film, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang vowed to accelerate the process of making cancer medication more affordable. “At the moment when there is a single cancer patient at home, the whole family must pour out all its resources,” the premier acknowledged. Some have criticized “Dying to Survive” for vilifying the foreign pharmaceutical company behind the expensive drugs while absolving Chinese authorities of responsibility. But such a portrayal may be necessary to accomplish the unusual feat of at once being critical and assuaging censors, said prominent social commentator Shi Shusi. “Dying to Survive” was able to “walk the thin tightrope of the regulators’ tolerance” because it addressed serious issues in an indirect, at times slapstick form, Shi said. “Capitalists have held our moral values for ransom in modern Chinese society,” Shi said. “But this movie shows the desire of Chinese audiences for high-quality art.” For Su, the leukemia patient in Harbin, the movie spelled out her experience with cancer when one character intoned, “There is only one disease in this world — the disease of being poor.” On her livestreams, Su sometimes wears a surgical mask. Often, her broadcasts are interrupted by a nurse or doctor who has come to check her blood levels. She thought at first that she was just stricken with the common cold. One night, she was walking home from a noodle restaurant when she suddenly felt dizzy. By the time she reached her apartment just a few blocks away, she was so weak that her cousin had to carry her to their sixth-floor unit. Then came the diagnosis, which her parents had at first attempted to hide. They were an “average family,” Su said, with a stable income from her father’s salary as a public servant. But it was not enough to cover her treatment for the next five years — the length of time her doctor estimated it would take for the cancer to be removed from her system — even when they had already sold their house and spent nearly 400,000 yuan ($58,979) in the last four months. So Su downloaded Inke, a popular Chinese livestreaming app, and started making videos about life with leukemia. After six weeks, she had nearly 800 fans — enough to make up to 400 yuan ($60) at a time from the virtual gifts her viewers sent her. The meager earnings were not yet enough to make a real dent in her medical bills, Su said, but livestreaming boosted her confidence and staved off the loneliness of being stuck in a hospital room. “I am sick, but I’m happy,” Su often tells her viewers. “I know I can be cured.”


Recall: Nearly 57 tons of ground beef for possible E coli.

Explanation: The federal government says a meat company in Georgia has recalled tons of ground beef for possible contamination with E. coli bacteria.

Georgia, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Health, Food safety, Business, Carrollton, Agriculture

The bacteria is an unusual strain that has sickened 156 people in 10 states , hospitalizing 20 of them. Ground beef had been described as the likely source. However, officials say they’re still testing to see whether the recalled beef is related to the outbreak. A recall notice from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety Inspection Service says K2D Foods is recalling about 56.7 tons (51.4 metric tons) of meat. K2D does business as Colorado Premium Foods of Carrollton, Georgia. The meat is in 48-pound boxes labeled “ground beef puck” for institutional use. Calls to the company’s headquarters in Greeley, Colorado, weren’t immediately returned.


child abuse, domestic violence, immigration, sanctuary cities,

A TV ad attacking Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp stretches some facts to paint the incumbent North Dakota senator as a “rubber stamp” for the “Washington liberal agenda.”The ad says Heitkamp supported “amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants, including domestic violence perpetrators and child abusers.” The bipartisan immigration bill Heitkamp supported would have toughened green card requirements, barring those convicted of domestic or child abuse who served a year or more in jail or who had two or more convictions for those offenses. She did oppose a proposed amendment that included a provision that would have gone even further, blocking those with only one misdemeanor conviction for domestic or child abuse.According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill Heitkamp supported, the so-called Gang of Eight immigration bill, would have resulted in 8 million getting on a path to citizenship, not 11 million as the ad claimed.The phrase “amnesty” is also misleading. The bill — which was also supported by North Dakota’s Republican senator, John Hoeven — would have provided an earned path to citizenship, not automatic and immediate citizenship, as amnesty implies.The ad makes the broader claim that Heitkamp “rubber-stamps the Washington liberal agenda.” But, according to the statistical website FiveThirtyEight, which is owned by ABC News, Heitkamp voted along with Trump’s agenda 55 percent of the time, the second highest percentage among Senate Democrats.The ad comes from the Senate Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC that was established by allies of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The group seeks to expand the Republican majority in the Senate. Heitkamp faces a challenge to her seat from Republican Rep. Kevin Cramer. The Senate Leadership Fund ad claims that Heitkamp “rubber-stamped her approval of amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants, including domestic violence perpetrators and child abusers.” (Another ad from the affiliated One Nation makes a similar claim against incumbent Democratic Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, saying he “voted to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, including criminals, drunk drivers, domestic violence and worse.”)This claim involves two votes related to a Senate immigration bill in 2013. Heitkamp supported S. 744, the so-called Gang of Eight immigration bill that was cosponsored by four Democrats and four Republicans. The bill would have provided an earned path to citizenship for certain immigrants in the country illegally and would have added a number of border security measures.During the floor debate, Sen. John Cornyn proposed an amendment to the bill that set “triggers” — including a 90 percent border apprehension rate and full operational control of the border — that would have to be met before eligible immigrants could pursue a path to citizenship. Then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called the amendment a “poison pill” designed to kill the compromise bill. Heitkamp was among those who voted successfully to kill the amendment.A week later, the Gang of Eight bill passed the Senate 68-32, and Heitkamp was among those who voted for it, along with Donnelly and Hoeven. It was never brought up for a vote in the House.The backing for the ad’s claim that she supported “amnesty” including for “domestic violence perpetrators and child abusers” is Heitkamp’s vote against the Cornyn amendment and her vote for the Gang of Eight bill.That’s because the Cornyn amendment also included provisions that would have added some misdemeanor offenses to the felonies that would prevent an immigrant from being eligible to pursue citizenship. Among them were domestic violence and child abuse or neglect.The Gang of Eight bill that passed, and that Heitkamp voted for, also toughened the law with regard to domestic violence and child abuse, though it didn’t go as far as the Cornyn amendment. The bill made inadmissible anyone who had served at least one year in jail or who had been convicted twice for either of those crimes.S. 744: Any alien who has been convicted of a crime of domestic violence, a crime of stalking, or a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment, provided the alien served at least 1 year imprisonment for the crime, or provided the alien was convicted of offenses constituting more than 1 such crime, not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct, is inadmissible.“Under current law you’re inadmissible (i.e. ineligible for a green card or even admission to the United States) if you committed a crime involving moral turpitude, a drug crime, or have multiple criminal convictions for which the aggregate sentence was 5 or more years. Domestic violence and child abuse don’t necessarily fall under any of those categories,” Sarah Pierce, a policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, told us via email.“Under Cornyn’s amendment applicants would be ineligible if they were convicted once of domestic violence or child abuse, even if it only qualified as a misdemeanor in the convicting jurisdiction,” Pierce said. “744 [the Gang of Eight bill] would have had more criminal inadmissibilities than we have currently, but not to the extent that Cornyn’s amendment proposed.”It’s fair to say that some immigrants convicted of domestic violence or child abuse would have been eligible for a path to citizenship under the Gang of Eight bill who would not have been eligible if Cornyn’s amendment had passed. But that provision did not come up for a stand-alone vote; it was just one small piece of a larger amendment that Heitkamp and other supporters of the Gang of Eight bill believed was designed to kill the bill.“As a former Attorney General, Heidi has always been tough on border security – that’s why she joined three lead Republicans in the Gang of Eight to vote against this poison pill amendment that they knew would have sunk a bipartisan bill that already addressed the amendment’s underlying goals,” Sean Higgins, a spokesman for the Heitkamp campaign, told us via email.Although several media outlets reported at the time the bill was introduced that it would provide a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants then in the country illegally, the Congressional Budget Office later explained that not all of them would gain legal status.As we wrote back in 2013, the nonpartisan CBO said in a June 2013 report that there were “about 11.5 million unauthorized residents living in the United States at the end of 2011.” But not all of them would have become legal under the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. The CBO said “approximately 8 million of the unauthorized residents already in the country would obtain legal status” under the bill.So the ad overestimates the number of people who would have gained legal status under the bill by 3 million.It also misleadingly says they would have been granted “amnesty.” Those seeking citizenship under the bill would have been required to pay fines and back taxes, prove gainful employment, complete criminal background checks, learn English and civics, and go to the back of the line behind legal immigrants who had already applied for citizenship.As we have written, such an earned path to citizenship does not meet the strict definition of amnesty, which implies that immigrants currently in the U.S. illegally would be granted immediate, permanent residency without any of the requirements listed above.It’s also a curious charge given that the ad faults Heitkamp for opposing the Cornyn amendment, which also would have ultimately allowed a similar path to citizenship for most of those who would have been eligible under the final Gang of Eight bill.Also notable is that Heitkamp was one of only three Democrats who earlier this year voted in support of the Broader Options for Americans Act proposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley, a bill that sought to incorporate President Donald Trump’s framework for an immigration bill. In addition to providing $25 billion for border security and new limits on legal immigration, the bill would have provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million so-called Dreamers, who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children and meet other requirements. Most of them would have been among those eligible for a path to citizenship under the Gang of Eight bill, and so are part of the millions the ad says would have been granted “amnesty.” The bill failed in the Senate.The ad says that “Heidi even supported sanctuary cities like San Francisco that harbor illegal immigrant criminals.”Heitkamp did vote against bills that would have cut off some federal funding, including law enforcement assistance, to cities deemed to be sanctuary cities — including these four bills, none of which passed after votes mostly along party lines.With its mention of “cities like San Francisco that harbor illegal immigrant criminals,” the ad appears to be referencing Kate Steinle, who was shot and killed in San Francisco by a Mexican national with a felony criminal record who had been deported several times. (The man, Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, was later acquitted of murder and involuntary manslaughter charges, as well as assault with a deadly weapon, though he was guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm. )The case ignited a national debate over sanctuary cities and was frequently referenced by Trump on the campaign trail. The case also spurred legislation in Congress, dubbed Kate’s Law, which sought to ramp up penalties for immigrants who return to the United States after having been previously deported. The bill failed, with votes largely along party lines. But Heitkamp was one of three Democrats who voted for it.After noting some of Heitkamp’s votes on immigration, the Iran nuclear deal and sanctuary cities, the ad concludes, “Heidi Heitkamp: She rubber stamps the Washington liberal agenda.” But that isn’t borne out by a full review of Heitkamp’s voting record.According to a FiveThirtyEight.com analysis last updated Aug. 27, Heitkamp has voted in sync with Trump’s position 55.3 percent of the time. That’s the second highest percentage for a Democrat, behind only Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, though it’s lower than the percentage for any Republican.A GovTrack analysis found Heitkamp votes well to the right of most Democrats on its ideology chart, and its 2017 report card ranked Heitkamp the fourth most conservative Democrat in the Senate.A Roll Call analysis released in March concluded, “Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, which Trump carried by 36 points, voted the president’s way two-thirds of the time and went against the partisan grain 30 percent of the time.”


Chemistry Nobel for using evolution to create new proteins.

Explanation: Three scientists won the Nobel Prize in chemistry Wednesday for using a sped-up version of evolution to create new proteins that have led to a best-selling drug and other products.

Biology, AP Top News, Health, Business, Europe, International News, Nobel Prizes, Medication, California, Science, Technology, Chemistry, University of Missouri, Stockholm

The Royal Swedish Academy of Science said their work has led to the development of medications, biofuels and a reduced environmental impact from some industrial processes. Frances Arnold of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena was awarded half of the 9-million-kronor ($1.01 million) prize, while the other half was shared by George Smith of the University of Missouri and Gregory Winter of the MRC molecular biology lab in Cambridge, England. Arnold is only the fifth woman to win a chemistry Nobel since the prizes began in 1901. The winners “have taken control of evolution and used it for purposes that bring the greatest benefit to humankind,” the Nobel committee said. In nature, evolution proceeds slowly as random genetic mutations generate variety in organisms and proteins, and those versions that work best in their environment persist for future generations. The research honored Wednesday mimicked that process by inducing mutations in proteins and selecting those that best met the goals of the research. Smith, 77, and Winter, 67, worked with viruses called phages that infect bacteria. Smith showed in 1985 that inserting DNA into these viruses would make them display proteins linked to that DNA on their surfaces. It was a way to find an unknown gene for a known protein. Winter adapted the approach to create useful antibodies, proteins that target and grab onto disease-related targets. Winter introduced mutations to make antibodies progressively better at binding to their targets. In 1994, for example, he developed antibodies that grab onto cancer cells. The first pharmaceutical based on Winter’s work, AbbVie’s adalimumab, was approved for sale in 2002. It’s used to treat immune-system disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and inflammatory bowel diseases, the academy said. Sold as Humira in the U.S. and under other brand names elsewhere, it brought AbbVie $18.4 billion in revenue last year, in part because of its price: about $5,000 a month without insurance coverage in the U.S. Other antibodies produced by this approach fight cancer, neutralize the anthrax toxin and slow down lupus, the Swedish academy said. Dr. Wayne Marasco of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston said the lab technique developed by Smith and Winter was “revolutionary  ... and it’s used today, every day.” Arnold, 62, was seeking ways to make improved enzymes, which are proteins that encourage chemical reactions to occur. In 1993, she showed the power of “directed evolution” for doing that. First she created random mutations in DNA that lets cells produce an enzyme. Then she slipped these mutated genes into bacteria, which pumped out thousands of different variants of the enzyme. One variant did a particularly good job at a certain task, so she made a new round of mutations in this variant. That produced another variant that worked better. When she made mutant versions of that variant, she got an even better version. It contained a combination of 10 mutations that nobody could have predicted would work so well, the Swedish academy said. Techniques for directed evolution have improved since then and Arnold has been at the leading edge, the academy said. Her tailored enzymes have become important for making medications and other valuable substances like renewable fuels. “Her work is incredible,” Matt Hartings, an associate chemistry professor at American University, told The Associated Press. Arnold, reached by telephone at an airport in Dallas, told the AP: “I predict that we will see many more Nobel chemistry prizes for women.” She learned she had won when she was “unceremoniously woken up” at 4 a.m. in her Texas hotel room. “The phone rang, and I was certain it was one of my kids or some emergency, but it wasn’t. First I was stunned, like somebody hit me over the head with something and then I started to wake up,” she said. Arnold flew back to California for a news conference at Caltech, which she called a “jewel of an institution” where she was always “pushed to do her best and do things other people couldn’t do.” In a short speech, she gave credit to her “inspiring” research team. “The Nobel Prize goes to me but it’s really a team of brilliant people who love what they do,” she said. Smith also credited others for the work that led to his breakthrough, telling a news conference at the University of Missouri that he was simply a part of a “huge web” of science. “Very few research breakthroughs are novel. Virtually all of them build on what went on before. It’s happenstance. That was certainly the case with my work,” he told the AP. Of the pre-dawn phone call from Stockholm informing him of his win, Smith said: “It’s a standard joke that someone with a Swedish accent calls and says ‘You won!’ But there was so much static on the line, I knew it wasn’t any of my friends.” Winter said an encounter with a cancer patient early in his career made him realize the importance of his work. The woman was receiving his then-experimental antibody treatment. Even though Winter didn’t know whether it would work, the patient was grateful for whatever extra time the treatment would give her to spend with her husband. Winter says he realized afterward there was a “moral imperative” to ensure “what was produced could be used for public benefit.” In other Nobel prizes this year, the medicine prize went Monday to James Allison of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Tasuku Honjo of Kyoto University, who developed an approach for unleashing the immune system on cancers,  helping doctors fight many advanced-stage cancer tumors. Scientists from the United States, Canada and France shared the physics prize Tuesday for revolutionizing the use of lasers in research. Arthur Ashkin became the oldest Nobel Prize laureate at 96, while Donna Strickland of the University of Waterloo in Canada became only the third woman to win a physics Nobel. Strickland had worked with the third winner, Frenchman Gerard Mourou of the Ecole Polytechnique and the University of Michigan. The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is to be announced Friday and the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences will be revealed on Monday. No Nobel literature prize will be awarded this year due to a sex abuse scandal at the Swedish Academy, which choses the winner. The academy plans to announce both the 2018 and the 2019 winner next year — although the head of the Nobel Foundation has said the body must fix its tarnished reputation first. The man at the center of the Swedish Academy scandal, Jean-Claude Arnault, was sentenced Monday to two years in prison for rape. ___ Heintz reported from Moscow, and Ritter and Chester from New York. Associated Press writers David Keyton in Stockholm, Danica Kirka in London, Linda Johnson in Trenton, N.J. and Christopher Weber in Los Angeles, contributed to this report. ___ Follow the AP’s coverage as the 2018 Nobel Prizes are awarded at https://apnews.com/tag/NobelPrizes .


UN sees bird flu changes but calls risk of people spread low.

Explanation: The World Health Organization says it has noticed changes in the bird flu virus now spreading in China, but says the risk of the disease spreading easily between people remains low.

World Health Organization, Health, Flu, International News, Bird flu, China, Science, Europe, Pandemics

The genetic mutations have been seen from birds and infected people, but because flu viruses change constantly, experts aren’t exactly sure how significant the differences may be. The H7N9 strain of bird flu showed up in China in 2013 and has mainly sickened people in close touch with chickens or other infected people. In a press briefing Wednesday, the U.N. health agency said in about 7 percent of recent cases, scientists have identified genetic changes suggesting the viruses are resistant to Tamiflu, the recommended treatment for the illness. The drug is being stockpiled worldwide in case there is a flu pandemic, possibly triggered by a mutated bird flu virus. Wenqing Zhang, head of WHO’s flu department, said the rate is similar to what has been picked up in previous years. “Constant change is the nature of all influenza viruses,” she said. Zhang said the mutations in the H7N9 virus have made it more deadly to birds, but she said it’s unclear what that might mean for humans. “The question is, does this change in the virus’ lethality make it any more lethal for humans? The jury is still out on that,” said Wendy Barclay, a professor at Imperial College London. Although bird flu cases in China have surged this year — and spilled over to Hong Kong and Taiwan — Barclay said there was no suggestion the virus is spreading more easily, particularly among people. Since October, 460 people in China have been infected, WHO said. That’s more than one-third of the 1,250 infections reported since 2013. Some scientists worry that China isn’t sharing enough information. Earlier this year, the country suddenly announced about 100 cases, a lag that could compromise efforts to track any changes in the virus’ spread. “We always need more and better information faster,” said Michael Osterholm of the University of Minnesota, adding that the continuing bird flu worries underline the world’s vulnerability to the next flu pandemic.


Discovery offers prospect of shorter treatment and cure for chronic myelogenous leukemia

Explanation: This news release by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is a teaser on a potential new drug target for sufferers of a blood cancer called chronic myelogenous leukemia, or CML, which affects 30,000 Americans a year. The release spends a good amount of space explaining the condition and problems with a standard treatment — a drug called Gleevec (a brand-name version of the drug imatinib) — and how up to 90% of patients with the disease face a lifetime of medication that may eventually stop working. It also does a nice job explaining a biological pathway that helps drive CML and why it might be a mechanism to target in the future, specifically Ezh2 inhibitors. However, the study was done in mice — not people. The release belatedly points this out in the final third of the text — but we would have liked to see it more prominently mentioned. The reason: The relevance may not transfer to people with CML. That’s also why we think the repeated use of the word “cure” and the possibility of shorter treatment in the headline is overstating and misleading. One glaring omission was that of price. The only allusion to price in the news release is an aside in the closing line noting shorter treatment times translate into cost savings. We’re also given no rough treatment cost estimates for an unnamed Ezh2 inhibitor made by Epizyme that’s mentioned in the release. Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) develops in bone marrow and affects myeloid cells. Those cells typically mature into platelets or red blood cells, but genetic and other abnormalities can lead them to mature into defunct granulocyte cells, i.e. leukemia. CML patients experience a gradual though sometimes rapid build-up of leukemia in their bones and then in their spleen, crowding out healthy cells over time. This drives symptoms that may include frequent infections (due to immune system weakening), fatigue (fewer red blood cells), and easy bleeding (fewer platelets). CML affects about 30,000 people each year and about 1.2 million to 1.5 million people worldwide, most of them middle-aged adults (though there are a few children). While patients who seek the standard of treatment — imatinib (marketed as Gleevec and Glivec) — receive it “indefinitely,” the median survival is between 5-6 years, since leukemia cells can build up resistance to imatinib-like drugs. In fact, about 80-90% of patients can’t clear all of their leukemia cells and stay on permanent drugs. By increasing the number of CML patients who can drive their cancer into remission, suffering could be dramatically reduced — as would the cost of their treatment. As teased by this release, Ezh2 inhibitors may (or may not) help CML patients. Clinical trials would have to determine if that hypothesis pans out.

chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML),Dana-Farber Cancer Institute,imatinib,mice studies

Oddly, the release includes a quote from the study’s leader about how “the cost savings of such an approach could … be significant” — yet treatment cost estimates are completely absent in the release. Cost deserved more than the nod given in this release. The release mentions the treatment will be a “Gleevec-like” drug so it’s notable that the costs may also be “Gleevec-like” to start. A 2016 Washington Post article noted that the wholesale cost of Gleevec had risen from $26,400 to $120,000 annually over the 15 years it has been on the market. Even with insurance, a patient might have paid $500-$800 month out-of-pocket for the drug, the Washington Post found. The introduction of generics after the patent on Gleevec expires this year will bring the cost down dramatically. In the chronic phase of the disease, where remission isn’t likely, the average cost for brand-name imatinib per year is $79,000 a year, or $92,000 by a more recent estimate. A large group of physicians wrote in a 2013 cost analysis study in the journal Blood: “We believe the unsustainable drug prices in CML and cancer may be causing harm to patients.” Fortunately, a generic drug should cost $46,000 a year as Gleevec loses patent exclusivity in 2016, according to a recent study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. But that’s just imatinib. Although the release mentions an Epizyme-made Ezh2 inhibitor drug in an unrelated Phase 1 clinical trial, it doesn’t name it. The release makes clear that its discovery of a potential weak point in a frustrating form of leukemia has the potential to push CML patients into remission. But it doesn’t quantify those results in any way. Even more importantly, the release drags its feet when disclosing that the research was performed in animal subjects. It remains to be seen if the treatment would have similar benefits for people. And that result could be many years down the road. Side effects are mentioned for imatinib, but never detailed. And this is a major oversight that would have benefited the crux of the release (i.e. a need for alternatives to imatinib-like drugs). One 2010 study assessed a flotilla of side effects, including muscle cramps, nausea, diarrhea, headaches, abdominal pain, joint pain, and more in greater than 10% of patients who take it for CML. But it also notes a rare few can be “sinister” in less than 1% of patients: heart damage, kidney failure, muscle degeneration, secondary cancers, and even cerebellar edema, which can cause fainting, seizures, and even put someone into a coma. The side-effects of Ezh2 inhibitors also aren’t noted since it seems the most promising one is still in clinical trials. Since the new drug hasn’t been tested in humans there is really no way to gauge side effects but all cancer drugs have them, often very serious ones as noted above. We’re told that when gene-editing techniques turned off Ezh2 in mice with CML, it prevented their leukemia cells from progressing, “halting the disease at its source.” But it’s one thing to go from a genetically engineered mouse to a human patient, let alone targeting that person’s disease with a fairly experimental drug. There are so many studies in mice that don’t pan out in humans. This release appears to be putting the cart before the horse. We don’t see anything that would scare a reader. We’re told the pharmaceutical company Epizyme opened a phase 1 clinical trial at Dana-Farber/Boston Children’s hospital. We’re also told an NIH grant and Hyundai Hope on Wheels is funding the study. The release also notes one of the authors on the study is an employee of Novartis Pharmaceuticals — which owns the (soon-to-expire) patent for Gleevec, also called Glivec. Aside from the current standard of care — imatinib-like drugs — the release only vaguely references “second- and third-line targeted therapies” that “can often return the disease to remission,” yet doesn’t name them. The release notes imatinib-like drugs are the standard of care for CML patients, implying a diagnosis would grant access to the drugs by prescription. Though it doesn’t name the potential Ezh2 inhibitor drug, the release does note it’s part of a Phase 1 trial, as well as other clinical trials — implying it’s not readily available. A lack of absolute clarity here isn’t helpful to readers, but there’s enough to mark this satisfactory. A statement that clarified that it would likely be years before testing in humans would be complete would have been appropriate here. The release does a decent job of teeing up the connection between the leukemia cells that drive CML and a biological pathway that an existing drug might be able to target. The repeated use of the term “cure” — including in the headline — when only preliminary animal data is being presented — is unjustifiable.


Michigan Capitol hosts collection of unwanted medications.

Explanation: Michigan residents can drop off unwanted medications at the state Capitol during an event intended to call attention to the need for proper disposal of unused drugs.

Medication, Michigan, Lansing, Environment, General News

The state Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy is hosting the annual program with the Michigan Pharmacists Association from 10:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Tuesday. Officials say getting rid of expired or otherwise unneeded drugs in a responsible way can help prevent abuse and accidental poisonings. It also protects the environment, particularly water resources. Controlled substances, narcotics and over-the-counter medications can be taken to the collection tent at the Capitol. People in other areas can check an online map for collection locations near them.


A law in Japan makes it illegal for citizens of that country to be fat.

Explanation: What's true: Japan requires citizens between the ages of 45 and 74 to have their waistlines measured once a year and potentially seek medical attention. What's false: Japanese citizens can be fined or imprisoned for being overweight.

In January 2008, Japan passed the “Metabo Law” in an effort to curb obesity in that country. While the law does require men and women between the ages of 45 and 74 to have their waistlines examined once a year and potentially seek medical treatment if their measurements fall outside established ranges, it did not establish obesity as a criminal offense. The Metabo Law was named after metabolic syndrome, a group of conditions, including high blood pressure and excess body fat, that can increase the risk of serious medical ailments:  Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of conditions — increased blood pressure, a high blood sugar level, excess body fat around the waist and abnormal cholesterol levels — that occur together, increasing your risk of heart disease, stroke and diabetes. Having just one of these conditions doesn’t mean you have metabolic syndrome. However, any of these conditions increase your risk of serious disease. If more than one of these conditions occur in combination, your risk is even greater. If you have metabolic syndrome or any of the components of metabolic syndrome, aggressive lifestyle changes can delay or even prevent the development of serious health problems. The New York Times reported in 2008 the Metabo Law affects men with waistlines larger than 35.4 inches and women with waistlines larger than 31.5 inches. People exceeding these governmental limits, which are identical to the measurements established by the International Diabetes Federation in 2006, may be required to go to counseling sessions or converse with a health expert about dietary options. Unlike individuals, however, companies and local governments can be assessed financial penalties if the citizens in their charge do not meet government standards:  To reach its goals of shrinking the overweight population by 10 percentover the next four years and 25 percent over the next seven years, the government will impose financial penalties on companies and local governments that fail to meet specific targets. The country’s Ministry of Health argues that the campaign will keep the spread of diseases like diabetes and strokes in check. The ministry also says that curbing widening waistlines will rein in a rapidly aging society’s ballooning health care costs, one of the most serious and politically delicate problems facing Japan today. Opponents of the Metabo Law maintain the weight guidelines are too strict. Japan is one of the least obese developed nations in the world, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and Yoichi Ogushi, professor at Tokai University’s School of Medicine, has argued the law will not have much of an effect on the health of Japan’s citizens:  “I don’t think the campaign will have any positive effect. Now if you did this in the United States, there would be benefits, since there are many Americans who weigh more than 100 kilograms [220 pounds]. But the Japanese are so slender that they can’t afford to lose weight.”


US births hit a 30-year low, despite good economy.

Explanation: U.S. birth rates declined last year for women in their teens, 20s and — surprisingly — their 30s, leading to the fewest babies in 30 years, according to a government report released Thursday.

AP Top News, Health, Immigration, Birth rates, U.S. News, Economy

Experts said several factors may be combining to drive the declines, including shifting attitudes about motherhood and changing immigration patterns. The provisional report, based on a review of more than 99 percent of the birth certificates filed nationwide, counted 3.853 million births last year. That’s the lowest tally since 1987. Births have been declining since 2014, but 2017 saw the greatest year-to-year drop — about 92,000 less than the previous year. That was surprising, because baby booms often parallel economic booms, and last year was a period of low unemployment and a growing economy. But other factors are likely at play, experts said. One may be shifting attitudes about motherhood among millennials, who are in their prime child-bearing years right now. They may be more inclined to put off child-bearing or have fewer children, researchers said. Another may be changes in the immigrant population, who generate nearly a quarter of the babies born in the U.S. each year. For example, Asians are making up a larger proportion of immigrants, and they have typically had fewer children than other immigrant groups. Also, use of IUDs and other long-acting forms of contraception has been increasing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report also found: —The rate of births to women ages 15 to 44, known as the general fertility rate, sank to a record low of about 60 per 1,000. —Women in their early 40s were the only group with higher birth rates in 2017, up 2 percent from the year before. The rate has been rising since the early 1980s. —The cesarean section rate rose by a tiny amount after having decreased four years. Studies have shown C-sections are more common in first-time births involving older moms. —Rates of preterm and low birth weight babies rose for the third straight year, possibly for the same reason. —Birth rates for teens continued to nosedive, as they have since the early 1990s. In 2017, they dropped 7 percent from the year before. —Rates for women in their 20s continued to fall and hit record lows. They fell 4 percent. —Perhaps most surprising, birth rates for women in their 30s fell slightly, dipping 2 percent for women ages 30 to 34 and 1 percent for women 35 to 39. Birth rates for women in their 30s had been rising steadily to the highest levels in at least half a century, and women in their early 30s recently became the age group that has the most babies. That decline caused some experts’ eyebrows to shoot up, but they also noted the dip was very small. “It’s difficult to say yet whether it marks a fundamental change or it’s just a blip,” said Hans-Peter Kohler, a University of Pennsylvania demographer who studies birth trends. Another notable finding: The current generation is getting further away from having enough children to replace itself. The U.S. once was among a handful of developed countries with a fertility rate that ensured each generation had enough children to replace it. The rate in the U.S. now stands less than the standard benchmark for replacement. It’s still above countries such as Spain, Greece, Japan and Italy, but the gap appears to be closing. A decade ago, the estimated rate was 2.1 kids per U.S. woman. In 2017, it fell below 1.8, hitting its lowest level since 1978. “That’s a pretty remarkable decline,” said Dr. John Santelli, a Columbia University professor of population and family health and pediatrics. ___ The Associated Press Health & Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.


Aspirin may cut cancer deaths, but caution urged

Explanation: From the appropriate title to the last precautionary sentence, this story provides the readers with a balanced perspective and places the study into context. This story gives readers key facts and a range of expert reactions and context about a study that re-analyzed heart disease prevention experiments and saw lower rates of cancer deaths among trial participants who had been assigned to take daily low-dose aspirin. Readers are clearly told that while this study provides new insight, there are some key questions that need to be answered before many experts would change their recommendations about aspirin. The only important shortcoming is that it reports only the relative risk reductions without also telling readers about the absolute differences in cancer death rates that the researchers observed. Cancers of all types are second only to heart disease as the cause of death in developed countries. A number of observational studies have suggested that the kind of low-dose aspirin regimen recommended for some people at risk of heart disease may also have some cancer-related benefits. This study attempts to avoid some of the inherent limitations of observational studies by using data that was collected as part of experimental trials that randomized people to take aspirin or a placebo pill. It is important that stories explain both the advantages and limitations of this kind of data analysis.

Although the story does not discuss costs, the price of aspirin is low and well-known. Yet it would be helpful for stories about population-wide recommendations to address total costs, even if the price for individuals seems low. Broader use of aspirin would also inevitably lead to an increase in the costs of treating bleeding ulcers and other adverse events and they should be acknowledged, even if there might be offsetting reductions in other treatment expenses. Like many other reports, this story relied exclusively on relative risk reduction. Overall the study noted a 3% incidence of cancer in participants who did not receive aspirin and a 2.3% incidence for those who took aspirin. Yes, that is a 23% reduction overall but a 0.7% absolute reduction. Put another way, if indeed aspirin is preventive, you would need to treat 150 people to prevent one occurence of cancer. That benefit needs to be put into context because aspirin is not without its side effects. Nevertheless, we are rating this as satisfactory despite the use of relative risk based, because it did not trumpet the relative risk reductions and emphasized the uncertainties and limitations of the study results. In contrast to some other stories we reviewed, from the lead sentence through the body of the story, it is clear that aspirin increases the risk of bleeding ulcers and other bleeding problems. The story includes a description of the key features of the study, noting that the researchers re-analyzed data from several experiments that compared the heart disease outcomes of people randomly assigned to take aspirin daily to those who were given placebo pills, and that the researchers then added in data from death records in order to asses long-term cancer death rates. The story highlights concerns about relying on data gathered to look at one health threat (heart disease) in order to draw conclusions about a completely different health threat (cancer). It is difficult to mention cancer and not fall victim to disease mongering. Few other disease provide a similar emotional response. The story highlights questions about who might receive some cancer-reduction benefit, noting that the data used for this study included very few women and that since the underlying trials were designed to look for heart disease effects and not cancer, there may be things about the participants that would affect the results, but weren’t recorded during the original trials. These caveats help make clear that there are still uncertainties about who exactly might benefit. The story includes comments from several independent sources and cites current guidelines that do not recommend trying to use aspirin to reduce cancer risk. The story also specifically notes that while the researchers did not get outside funding for this study, several of the authors have been paid consultants to pharmaceutical companies. The story not only highlights comments from those who say it is too early to recommend aspirin as a way to reduce cancer risk, it includes a comment recommending keeping a healthy body weight and not smoking in order to prevent cancer. The availability of aspirin is well-known. Indeed it is so common as to be often perceived as innocuous. Since readers may take aspirin without consulting a health care professional, stories about aspirin should clearly distinguish between those uses that a well-supported by evidence and those that require further evaluation. The story points out that certain people already take low-dose aspirin because of heart disease concerns. The context and cautions included in this story are a welcomed departure from some other stories we reviewed. The story notes that this study adds to previous research that has looked at the potential cancer-related effects of aspirin. The story does not appear to rely on a news release.


Bodycad Announces First Use of Its Unicompartmental Knee System in Patients

Explanation: This news release announces the first two implantations of Bodycad’s Unicompartmental Knee System, knee replacement devices manufactured for individual patients using 3D printing technology and Bodycad’s “proprietary methods.” Despite claims throughout that the 3D printed devices result in “a better fit” and “the potential for improved clinical results,” the company offers no data or evidence and does not reference any studies measuring the effectiveness of the devices. The device has received clearance from the FDA in a letter stating the device is “substantially equivalent” to existing devices already in use. It should give readers pause that neither the news release or FDA letter indicate that any studies on patient outcomes were completed or even required. We offer a primer that describes the weak regulations governing approval of medical devices like this one. The news release neglected to mention that one of the surgeons quoted received more than $90,000 in payments from two manufacturers of joint replacement devices during 2016. Many people receiving knee replacements (or knee arthroplasty) are elderly and with our aging population, it’s expected the numbers of these procedures will keep growing. Estimates on the number of knee replacements performed each year in the US vary, but are projected to reach 3.4 million by 2030. Devices manufactured specifically for individuals to replicate their existing knee joint could potentially improve clinical outcomes but studies of this device are still needed to show its benefit.

There is no mention of cost for the device itself or for the implantation surgery. The news release says manufacture is rapid, but gives no indication as to the actual time it takes, nor are the device’s component materials mentioned, so no estimation of materials costs can be made. The cost for 3D printed knee replacements are undoubtedly higher than traditional replacements. The news release states that a personalized knee joint would fit better and therefore provide better results. However, there is no data supporting how much better the device fits, how closely existing knee replacement devices do fit, nor is there any mention of how patients lives improved after receiving the implants. Did they have less pain? Increased mobility? Some measurement is needed here. The news release does not mention any potential harms from knee replacement surgery in general or for the 3-D printed knee replacement specifically. There are risks associated with new medical devices and the risks increase when the device has not been tested. The release doesn’t include any evidence. There are testimonials from two surgeons who implanted the two devices and a statement by Jean Robichaud, president of Bodycad, who said “These recent procedures reinforce a growing body of evidence that demonstrates the benefit of personalized restorations.” But no reference is provided for that evidence. There is no disease mongering. A percentage of the aging population and some athletes will require knee replacement surgery. While no funding sources are mentioned, it is obvious from the news release that Bodycad is the funding source of their device. There is also an obvious conflict of interest because the company wants to sell their product and the company controls the U.S. patent. But this is expected from a news release from a company touting its own product. At least one of the surgeons quoted in the release has received funding from manufacturers of joint replacement devices. Dr. Brain Hamlin received $$87,737 from Smith & Nephew in 2016 and $8,127 from Depuy Orthopaedics, also in 2016, according to Open Payments, a federal transparency program. These conflicts should have been included in the release. While the news release does compare the 3-D printed device to conventional devices suggesting that personalized devices are better, there are no data showing that this is the case. The whole point of the news release is to say that Bodycad can make personalized knee replacements and it has implanted two of them and it worked. By mentioning that the devices were cleared for use in the U.S. and Europe the company makes it clear they are available. It’s unknown, though, how many surgeons have been trained in the use of the devices. The news release doesn’t establish novelty. In fact, it implies that other companies are making personalized knee replacement devices, but that theirs is better. The news release states, “The efficient, rapid, and highly automated process is the only one of its kind in the world that is impeccably integrated between software and modern manufacturing such as 3D printing.” Companies have been developing customized joint replacement devices for about 25 years. Last year, a company called ConforMIS released results from its prospective study of 62 patients that received either its customized knee replacement product or a conventional device. The release’s use of the word “revolutionary” is unjustified because 1) customized knee replacement devices are not unique to this company and 2) the release provided no evidence of its benefits.


Canine Carry Outs dog treats contain anti-freeze and are therefore dangerous to dogs.

Explanation: Consumers continue to be confused by misinformation about entries in ingredients labels.

In March 2015, rumors appeared on social media that dog treat brand Canine Carry Outs (commonly misspelled as “Canine Carryouts”) contains anti-freeze under the “hidden” ingredient name of propylene glycol and is therefore dangerous to feed to dogs. Similar rumors had circulated online about Canine Carry Outs before the claim migrated to Facebook in 2015 (as well as earlier Facebook version did not circulate as widely):  The Canine Carry Outs warning closely resembled a similar rumor about Purina’s Beneful brand pet food, which circulated in early 2015 as well. Although Beneful wasn’t mentioned in the Facebook warning shown above, it’s possible that the rumor also stemmed from earlier alerts that mentioned other brands of dog foods in conjunction with propylene glycol. It’s not accurate to suggest that propylene glycol is a “hidden” ingredient in pet treats, is the same thing as “anti-freeze,” and is inherently dangerous to dogs in any amount. As the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) explains, propylene glycol is a common food additive that is classified as “generally recognized as safe” when consumed within recommended limits:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has classified propylene glycol as an additive that is “generally recognized as safe” for use in food. It is used to absorb extra water and maintain moisture in certain medicines, cosmetics, or food products. It is a solvent for food colors and flavors, and in the paint and plastics industries. Propylene glycol is also used to create artificial smoke or fog used in fire-fighting training and in theatrical productions. Other names for propylene glycol are 1,2-dihydroxypropane, 1,2-propanediol, methyl glycol, and trimethyl glycol. Although propylene glycol is not approved for use in cat food, it is classed as generally recognized as safe for dogs in addition to humans and is not “anti-freeze,” as Purina noted in response to questions about its use in pet food:  Propylene glycol is quite different from ethylene glycol, the anti-freeze used in automobiles. Propylene glycol is approved as a food additive in human food and in feed for animals, except cats, in the U.S. and Canada. Ethylene glycol — not propylene glycol — is the active compound in most automobile radiator anti-freeze solutions, and is toxic to animals and humans when ingested. Propylene glycol has a different molecular structure, giving it different properties and allowing it to be used safely in animal feed, except for cats, as well as in human foods, such as cake mixes, salad dressings, soft drinks, popcorn, food coloring, fat-free ice cream and sour cream. Propylene glycol can be used as a non-toxic anti-freeze, just as salt can be used as an “anti-freeze.” The differences in the molecular make-up of propylene glycol and ethylene glycol have significantly different impacts on health and safety for humans and pets. Propylene glycol is approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A similar rumor was spread in 2016 by Dr. Chloe Charlton, a veterinarian in Little Rock, Arkansas, who claimed that one of her canine patients had been “poisoned” by Canine Carry Outs, that “a report to the FDA has come back conclusive,” and that the FDA had “recommended removal of these treats”:  When the Petful website attempted to question Dr. Charlton regarding the many questionable aspects of her claims, she declined to be interviewed. In fact, contrary to what Dr. Charlton asserted, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has never issued any warning or recall/withdrawal notice about Canine Carry Outs brand dog treats.


Chile ranks third internationally in economic freedom, while the U.S. ranks 17th.

Explanation: Beck says Chile easily tops U.S. in "economic freedom" rankings

National, Economy, Foreign Policy, Pundits, Glenn Beck,

Chile, an eager adapter of free-market principles in Latin America, has long been a favorite of economic conservatives. Recently, a decision by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development -- the club of rich nations -- to invite Chile to become a member has become, for many on the right, symbolic of how adhering to free-market principles can vault former Third World countries into economic affluence. In a video blog post dated Jan. 15, 2010, conservative TV and radio host Glenn Beck championed Chile as a nation no longer "struggling with poverty," having overcome a reputation for corruption and bureaucracy through such policies as freer labor markets and lower taxes. In addition to citing the OECD invitation, Beck pointed to its high standing in recent international ratings of "economic freedom." "They ranked 71st of 72 in 1975 in a study of economic freedom in the world," Beck said in his video blog post. "Now, in that same study, they rank third. The U.S. is ranked 17th." We wondered whether Chile is really that far ahead of the U.S. in "economic freedom," so we looked at the data. We located an editorial in Investor's Business Daily -- a leading voice for free-market capitalism -- that appears to be the source of Beck's statistic. The editorial, published Dec. 4, 2009, was later picked up by a smattering of conservative bloggers on its way to Beck's desk. The editorial said in part, "In the Cato Institute's 1975 Economic Freedom of the World Report, [Chile] ranked a wretched 71 out of 72 countries evaluated. Today it's a different country altogether. Embracing markets has made it one of the most open economies in the world, ranking third on Cato's index, just behind Hong Kong and Singapore." Later on, the editorial added that the United States "ranks just 17th on Cato's 2009 Index of Economic Freedom." However, if you look at the 2009 Economic Freedom of the World study by Cato -- a libertarian think tank in Washington -- the numbers were actually different. Hong Kong and Singapore did indeed rank 1 and 2, respectively, but then came New Zealand and Switzerland before Chile at No. 5. In the No. 6 spot, behind by a fraction of a point, was the United States. So while it's true that, by Cato's reckoning, Chile ranked ahead of the United States, it was less of a blowout than Beck or IBD indicated. We also looked at the two prior years' Cato studies to make sure that Beck wasn't simply off by a year. That wasn't the case. In the 2008 study, Chile ranked No. 6 with the United States at 8, in a two-way tie with Australia and once again behind by a fraction of a point. And in the 2007 study, the United States actually ranked higher than Chile. The United States was tied for fifth while Chile was tied for 11th. One of the co-authors of Cato's 2009 study -- Joshua Hall, a Beloit College economist -- also confirmed to PolitiFact that the United States has never ranked as low as 17th in all the years that study has been conducted. Another co-author, James Gwartney, a Florida State University economist, confirmed that Beck was correct in saying that Chile ranked 71st out of 72 countries in 1975. In the meantime, we also looked at whether Beck (or IBD) had mistaken the Cato study for a different report. As it happens, there are at least three other studies that attempt to rank the nations of the world based on "economic freedom" or a similar yardstick. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, publishes an annual Index of Economic Freedom. In 2009, the United States ranked sixth in its study while Chile ranked 11th. The World Economic Forum, a Geneva-based international organization, publishes an annual Global Competitiveness Index. Its 2009-10 ratings peg the United States at No. 2 and Chile at 30. Finally, the World Bank publishes an annual "Doing Business" ranking that seeks to measure which countries have a regulatory environment "conducive to the operation of business." In this tally, the United States finished fourth overall with Chile 49th. Given these ratings, it would seem unlikley that Beck or IBD could have accidentally been referring to any of these studies. However, we would be remiss if we failed to add that, despite the apparent flub on reporting the rankings, Beck's overall assessment of Chile's recent economic history is largely accurate. We spoke with three experts on Latin American economics and politics who work with centrist-to-liberal think tanks -- Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations, Andres Martinez of the New America Foundation and Leonardo Martinez-Diaz of the Brookings Institution -- and they agreed that there is a broad ideological consensus on Beck's two key points: Namely, Chile has improved its economic position in recent years and that free-market policies can take some of the credit. "If trends continue, Chile will soon be considered one of those rare countries that has graduated out of the developing world, according to plenty of living-standard indices," Andres Martinez said. "The country is also the poster child for those who believe globalization and free trade can lift living standards, as Chile's economic course has long been anchored in its free-trade agreement with the U.S. and its dynamic export sector. It also stands out among South American countries in that its governing socialists have pragmatically been the ones embracing this pro-business, market-oriented economy." So while there is some truth to Beck's underlying point that Chile has improved its economic freedom, he's wrong to portray Chile as ranking far ahead of the United States. By several measures, the United States ranks significantly higher than Chile; in one, Chile is slightly ahead. So we find his claim Barely True. Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to .


Connecticut reports more vaping-related lung illnesses.

Explanation: The Connecticut Department of Public Health is reporting three more residents are ill with lung injuries possibly related to vaping.

Health, General News, Public health, Connecticut, Hartford, Vaping, Injuries

The department said Friday that the new cases bring the number of such illnesses among Connecticut residents reported since August to 34, though the specific cause of the injuries is not yet known. Twenty-six patients reported vaping with THC, the high-inducing ingredient in marijuana, 90 days before becoming sick. Of those cases, 17 were in Fairfield, nine in New Haven, three in New London and two in Hartford, and one in Litchfield, Tolland and Windham counties. One person in Connecticut has died. The CDC said Thursday 33 people have died of lung injuries associated with vaping products in 24 states.


Sanofi's Lantus insulin favored over rival: study.

Explanation: A once-daily injection of  Sanofi-Aventis’s insulin drug Lantus controls blood sugar as  effectively as Eli Lilly’s Humalog, which needs to be taken  three times daily, researchers said on Friday.

The study of 418 people with type 2 diabetes in 69 sites  across Europe and Australia also found that Lantus was  associated with a lower risk of potentially dangerous low blood  sugar level. The researchers reported their findings in the journal  Lancet. “We conclude that (Lantus) provides a simple and effective  option that is more satisfactory to patients than is (Humalog)  for early initiation of insulin therapy,” Reinhard Bretzel of  Justus-Liebig-Universitat in Germany and colleagues wrote. Diabetes is a condition in which a person’s blood glucose  levels are too high. Too much glucose in the blood can damage  the eyes, kidneys and nerves, and lead to heart disease, stroke  and limb amputations. Type 2 diabetes is the form closely linked to obesity. Insulin treatments aim to limit glucose, or blood sugar,  level without causing it to fall so low that it could cause  hypoglycaemia — a condition marked by tremors and nausea that  in extreme cases can kill. During the 44-week trial researchers randomly assigned  volunteers to receive one of the types of injections. Lantus  reduced blood sugar levels to 7 percent from 8.7 percent while  the average Humalog decrease was to 6.8 percent from 8.7  percent, the study found. Doctors target concentrations of less than 7 percent to  reduce the risk of blindness, kidney problems and gangrene, the  researchers added. Rates of hypoglycaemia were also lower for people using  Lantus, amounting to 5.2 patients per year compared to 24  patients per year with Humalog, the researchers said. An additional benefit, the Sanofi-funded study showed, was  that Lantus patients were more satisfied with their treatment,  likely because of the convenience of fewer daily injections,  the researchers said. “Study participants taking (Lantus) reported greater  overall treatment satisfaction, with specific improvements in  convenience of treatments,” the researchers wrote.


A photo shows Kamala Harris is “listed as Caucasian on her birth certificate.”

Explanation: We don’t know if this is actually Kamala Harris’ birth certificate, but it doesn’t list her as “Caucasian.”

Candidate Biography, Race and Ethnicity, Facebook Fact-checks, Viral image,

U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., is the first Black woman and the first person of Indian descent to be tapped by a major party in the United States to run for vice president. But since Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden named her as his running mate, questions — and misinformation — about her heritage have populated social media platforms. One Facebook post that’s gained traction is what’s described as an image of Harris’ birth certificate and the claim that her parents listed her as "Caucasian" on it. "Sen K Harris listed as Caucasian on her birth certificate … by her parents …" the post says. It was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat  news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) We reached out to the Biden campaign about the Facebook post but did not immediately hear back. We don’t know if the image of the birth certificate is authentic. But either way, the document in the image doesn’t list a race for Harris and it doesn’t describe her as Caucasian. It’s not unusual for a birth certificate not to list a child’s race, though the race of the child’s parents has been used to determine the race of the child "for statistical purposes," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The document identifies Harris’ mother as Shyamala Gopalan. In the field that says "Color or Race of Mother," Caucasian is typed below. Gopalan was born in what is now called Chennai, India, and moved to California after college to pursue a doctorate in nutrition and endocrinology at the University of California, Berkeley. Under "Color or Race of Father," it says "Jamaican." Harris’ father, Donald Harris, was born in Jamaica and also migrated to the United States to attend Berkeley. We’ve previously debunked a photo that questioned Harris’ race and wrongly claimed the people in the image were her parents. This claim merits a similar rating. .


Sanofi ends research in diabetes, narrows units to spur profit.

Explanation: Sanofi SA said on Monday it would end its research efforts in diabetes and cardiovascular diseases as part of a revamp that will narrow the number of its business units in the hope of bolstering growth and profit.

The French drugmaker, whose pipeline has disappointed investors in recent years, poached new chief executive Paul Hudson from Swiss pharma group Novartis in September to revitalize the company. Its move to ditch diabetes research - announced alongside cost savings targets - marks a major turning point for a firm whose products dominated the insulin market for nearly two decades, before it was hit by patent losses and a drop in sales. “We recognize it is getting more difficult to get breakthrough innovation and that we have to be efficient and move our resources to areas of opportunity, as tough a choice as that is,” Hudson told reporters. The firm is bulking up elsewhere, as in the lucrative field of cancer drugs. It announced a deal to buy U.S. biotechnology firm Synthorx for about $2.5 billion earlier on Monday. Sanofi, which is due to further detail strategic plans to investors on Tuesday in Cambridge, Massachusetts, said it was targeting new cost savings of 2 billion euros ($2.20 billion) by 2022, by tightening spending and shaking up its supply chain. It also aims for a core operating margin of 30% by then, up from 25.8% last year. The group emphasized the potential for its eczema treatment Dupixent, recently approved in other therapeutic areas such as asthma, with an aim to expand sales to more than 10 billion euros. Revenue for the drug, developed with U.S. partner Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc, was up 268% in 2018, reaching 788 million euros. Sanofi, currently organized around five global business units, said it would rejig these around three pillars: specialty care, which includes oncology and rare diseases, as well as vaccines and general medicines. Its consumer healthcare unit - known for over-the-counter products such as paracetamol Doliprane, erectile dysfunction drug Cialis and influenza treatment Tamiflu - will be considered as a standalone business, Sanofi said. It would have its own operational dynamic, the firm added, though it did not clarify what this meant in the longer term. Sources told Reuters last month that Sanofi was considering a joint venture or an outright sale among options for the division. “Our objective for the consumer healthcare business is to unlock value and entrepreneurial energy by growing faster than the market over mid-term,” Hudson said.


Eye surgery law sparks unusually public dispute in Arkansas.

Explanation: As an optometrist in the small Arkansas town of Osceola, Dr. Matthew Jones must tell patients several times a week to seek treatment elsewhere — sometimes as far as an hour away — for procedures he says he’s fully capable of performing.

Legislature, AP Top News, Lobbying, General News, Health, Arkansas, Little Rock, U.S. News, Laws

“They look at me and ask, ‘Why don’t you just do it?’ I tell them, ‘I’m not legally allowed to do it,’” Jones said. He and other optometrists hope to change that after successfully lobbying Arkansas’ Legislature to change the law to expand the procedures they can perform. It prompted an unexpectedly expensive and heated lobbying fight in the Statehouse, with ophthalmologists arguing the law will put patients at risk. The change is now on hold and could go before voters next year. It’s an unusually high-profile example of a fight that’s being waged in other medical fields, as policymakers try to find ways to expand access to care and cut costs. “This is, to me, a marker of a whole new era where we’re going to see a lot more of this stuff,” said Dr. Ashish Jha, a professor of health policy at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The Arkansas law would allow optometrists to perform several procedures that currently only ophthalmologists can, including injections around the eye, removing lesions from the eyelids and certain laser eye surgeries. Much of the debate has focused on whether optometrists have the necessary training. Optometrists complete a four-year program on eye care after graduating from college and are licensed by the state Board of Optometry. Ophthalmologists are physicians licensed by the state Medical Board who have graduated from medical school, completed a yearlong hospital internship and at least three years of residency. “There is no minimally invasive surgical procedure of the eye,” said Dr. Laurie Barber, an ophthalmologist in Little Rock and the chairwoman of Safe Surgery Arkansas. Her group, which is trying to repeal the law, says the procedures should be performed by medical doctors who have surgical experience. Supporters of the law change say optometrists are already trained to perform the procedures and that forcing them to send their patients elsewhere poses a hardship in a mostly rural state where ophthalmologists aren’t easy to find. Jones, for example, estimates that about one in five of his patients walk or bike to his clinic in Osceola. He also has a clinic in neighboring Blytheville. “When you’re sitting right there and you can have a procedure taken care of, you should be able to,” said Dr. Barbara Horn, president of the American Optometric Association. Carolyn Lay, who has been seeing Barber for 20 years, said she would rather see an ophthalmologist for the procedures detailed in the state law. “I don’t think they should ever be equal until both parties have to do the same amount of school,” Lay said. Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma have laws similar to the one approved by the Arkansas Legislature. Similar legislation expanding what optometrists can do has been proposed in several other states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The debate over expanding “scope of practice” for some medical fields isn’t new, especially in states where lawmakers are trying to find ways to expand access to patients in rural areas. Hundreds of such bills come up in state legislatures every year, including efforts in several states to allow nurse practitioners to see patients without partnering with a doctor. Those efforts have faced similar pushback from doctors’ groups who warn that it would put patients at risk. Efforts to loosen restrictions on nurse anesthetists and advanced practice registered nurses failed in the Arkansas Legislature this year. A lobbyist for the Arkansas Ophthalmological Society spent more than $111,000 on the group’s unsuccessful effort to the defeat the optometry expansion in the Legislature, according to figures compiled by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Safe Surgery Arkansas has spent more than $150,000 gathering signatures to put a referendum on the law on the November 2020 ballot. State officials are now verifying whether the group gathered enough valid signatures after it submitted petitions on Tuesday. Supporters of the optometry law signaled they’ll challenge the petitions, arguing that many of the signatures submitted are invalid because canvassers hadn’t filed necessary paperwork with the state. Safe Surgery has said it’s confident it’s complied with the law. “It’s important that the state as a whole be able to vote on this issue,” Alex Gray, an attorney for Safe Surgery Arkansas, said. ___ Follow Andrew DeMillo on Twitter at www.twitter.com/ademillo