Explanation: Illinois Senate Majority Leader Kimberly Lightford said the novel coronavirus was "man-made." Research shows the genetic features of the virus rule out the possibility it was created or manipulated in a lab. In response to our inquiry, Lightford acknowledged she had no evidence to back up her statement.

Illinois, Coronavirus, Kimberly Lightford,

Speculation about the origin of the novel coronavirus has spread online since the beginning of the pandemic, with Facebook posts and tabloids making baseless claims the virus was created in a lab. But it isn’t only social media users who have perpetuated the conspiracy theory the virus was bioengineered. In Illinois, a prominent state politician suggested the same thing: "This man-made killer — whoever went in there and man-made it, perhaps they should be in there now trying to figure out how to turn this around," Illinois Senate Majority Leader Kimberly Lightford of Maywood said during a May 15 appearance on Fox 32. "I don’t believe it’s a natural virus," Lightford continued, after the program’s host asked Lightford if she thinks the virus did not occur naturally. "I believe someone was in cahoots for some reason and I think it just got a little bit out of control and spread a whole lot further than they anticipated." But to leading experts, the research is clear: the genetic structure of the virus shows it could not have been created in a lab — or be "man-made," as Lightford claimed. An article published March 17 in Nature Medicine says the genetic makeup of the coronavirus does not indicate it was altered. Instead, the researchers who conducted the analysis present two plausible explanations for the origin of the virus: natural selection in an animal host, or natural selection in humans after the virus spread from animals. That finding doesn’t rule out the much-publicized theory the virus may have somehow escaped from a lab in China where it was being studied, though the government there has denied this. But what is known makes it clear the virus itself is not the result of human tampering. "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus," the article states, using the scientific name for the virus that causes COVID-19. Experts from a number of different research and public health institutions, including the World Health Organization, say the most likely explanation for the virus is that it originated in animals. U.S. intelligence officials and Dr. Anthony Fauci, who directs the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, have also said the science indicates the virus was not made in a lab. When we reached out to Lightford, she acknowledged she had no evidence to support her assertion the virus was created by humans. "I have nothing to back it up," she wrote in a text in response to our call. "I was generally speaking. Only my opinion." Lightford said the novel coronavirus was "man-made." But research shows the genetic features of the virus rule out the possibility it was created or manipulated in a lab. The consensus among experts is that it originated in animals before being transmitted to humans. We rate her claim . — The statement is not accurate.


High ambitions: Uruguay cannabis firm targets booming global market for medical marijuana.

Explanation: In a white, sterilized laboratory on the outskirts of Uruguayan capital Montevideo, biochemist Javier Varela and his team are carefully cultivating plants for a booming multibillion-dollar global market in medical marijuana.

The company Varela works for, Fotmer Life Sciences, has just made the first commercial shipment of medical cannabis from Latin America, 10 kg (22 lb) of dried flowers with high levels of active ingredient THC destined for patients in Australia. The small but landmark export underscores the country’s push into the burgeoning market for legal cannabis, that has medical uses including helping cancer patients manage chronic pain or treating spasms associated with multiple sclerosis. “Our goal is to create a billion-dollar industry here in Uruguay in the next five to seven years,” Jordan Lewis, chief executive of Fotmer Life Sciences, told Reuters at the Montevideo lab. The firm soon hopes to announce shipments to the European Union, where Germany is the key market, he added. Uruguay has been ahead of the curve. It was the first country to legalize the growing, sale and smoking of marijuana in December 2013 in a pioneering social experiment closely watched by other nations debating drug liberalization. The number of countries legalizing the use of medical cannabis is expected to almost double to around 80 in the future, Lewis said, “creating a potential (global) market of $100 billion in the next ten years.”  In the coming weeks the firm will begin exporting 100 kg  each month of dried flowers and cannabis extracts, Lewis said. The potential is clear. While market forecasts range widely, advisory and investment bank Cowen Inc predicts the U.S. cannabis market alone could be worth $80 billion by 2030. In the company’s facilities, in a science park complex 21 km (13 miles) from Montevideo’s center, Varela’s team of scientists are taking things seriously. To get into the white-walled labs, visitors must wear plastic cloth shoes, a tunic, cap, mask and latex gloves. Varela says it is vital to control the quality of the environment for the cannabis plants, especially given the high global standards needed for making medicines as well as in the handling of agricultural products. Each plant has a number and bar code, part of system to track the production process and catch possible genetic issues. There were 350 marijuana plants growing and 27 different genetic varieties when Reuters visited. The plants once ready are transferred to 18 industrial-size greenhouses in Nueva Helvecia, 120 km away, equipped with drying, curing and packaging machinery. Varela, a biochemist, got interested in studying the uses of cannabis while doing a doctorate in the Netherlands. When he returned to Uruguay, he joined one of the early projects being done by Uruguayan Fernando Sassón along with American Lewis. Uruguay’s support for the industry has put it at the forefront of the growing global market, he said. “As we see legalization happening at a global and regional level, Uruguay is pushing ahead to develop highly-qualified people with the right skills really quickly.”


House Bill 330 "grants immunity from liability to motorists who strike protesters.

Legal Issues, Public Safety, North Carolina, Roy Cooper,

As graphic images emerged from Virginia over the weekend of a car crashing into a crowd of people, some turned their attention to a proposed North Carolina law that aims to protect drivers who inadvertently injure protesters in the street. House Bill 330 was introduced in response to protests in Charlotte last fall, when some residents who were upset about the police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott blocked interstate highways and other roads in the city. The N.C. House of Representatives approved the bill this spring but it hasn’t been considered by the state Senate. The bill drew renewed scrutiny after an Ohio man named James Fields, 20, allegedly rammed his car into a crowd of people protesting a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va. The car killed one woman and injured 19 others. The news sparked fears that drivers in North Carolina could hit protesters without legal repercussions. On Tuesday, Gov. Roy Cooper called for legislators to let the bill die. "The North Carolina legislature should defeat a bill that grants immunity from liability to motorists who strike protesters. That bill passed the state House and remains alive in the Senate. The Senate should kill it. Full stop. Those who attack protesters, weaponizing their vehicles like terrorists, should find no safe haven in our state." he wrote. We wondered whether the bill really "grants immunity from liability to motorists who strike protesters," as Cooper said. A ‘tightly tailored’ bill? Cooper spokesman Ford Porter elaborated on the governor’s statement in an email. "The purpose of the bill is to immunize certain drivers from findings of liability. Courts already take into consideration the circumstances surrounding an accident – this legislation adds vague new protections specifically for people who hit protesters with their cars," Porter said. "That sends the wrong message and opens the door to potentially serious consequences. Governor Cooper has been clear that our state has no business going down this path." The bill’s authors, Republican state Reps. Justin Burr and Chris Millis, released a statement saying the bill is "tightly tailored" to protect drivers as well as people who are lawfully exercising their First Amendment rights. "It is intellectually dishonest and a gross mischaracterization to portray North Carolina House Bill 330 as a protection measure for the act of violence that occurred in Charlottesville this past weekend," Burr and Millis said. "Any individual who committed a deliberate or willful act, such as what happened this weekend in Charlottesville, would face appropriately severe criminal and civil liabilities." What the bill says The one-page bill, which is short by legislative standards, aims to provide legal immunity from personal-injury lawsuits to motorists who exercise "due care" when driving but injure someone who blocks traffic while participating in a protest. The bill expresses important distinctions: it wouldn’t apply to drivers who injure protesters through "willful or wanton" actions; nor would it apply to drivers who injure someone who has a permit to protest in the street. It also wouldn’t apply to someone being criminally prosecuted. And it certainly wouldn’t allow drivers to "weaponize" their cars without legal consequence. In short, the bill doesn't grant immunity to anyone who hits a protester on purpose. What it changes Attorneys and legal experts doubt that the bill would have much impact because state laws already offer broad protections to drivers who accidentally hit people who are unlawfully in the street. In North Carolina, Virginia, Alabama and Maryland, state law makes it difficult for a plaintiff to win. Other states apply the doctrine of "comparative fault." Let’s say a protester in a comparative fault state is found to be 20 percent responsible for his or her injury and a driver is found to be 80 percent at fault. State laws in those states merely limit – not block – the amount of money awarded to the protester. In North Carolina, by contrast, state laws apply the doctrine of "contributory negligence." If a defendant proves "that the Plaintiff is even 1 percent responsible for their injuries – they lose automatically," said T. Greg Doucette, a criminal defense and business litigation attorney based in Durham. Doucette said the effect of the bill is unknown because it’s untested. But, on the bill’s surface, it seems to change little about civil litigation. Proving intent If the bill were to pass, how would it play out in court? If a protester is in the street and doesn’t have a permit, but thinks a driver intentionally struck him with his car, the protester would have to prove "willful and wanton" intent. Donald Beskind, a Duke University professor who’s practiced law for more than 30 years, said juries in that kind of situation are asked to consider direct and circumstantial evidence. Most cases are clear cut, he said. "If you want to know if someone was careful, you would want to look at what they were doing at the time of the accident. If they were texting, we would infer they were not careful," Beskind said. If someone drove into protesters and "on the back side of their car there was a sign that said ‘Kill the Antifa,’ we would assume they were being willful," he added, referring to the anti-fascist political organization. Inspiring recklessness? Effectiveness or ineffectiveness aside, attorneys said the bill might inspire violent acts by people who don’t understand the laws. "While I don’t think it would make the Charlottesville thing legal by any stretch of the imagination, it could embolden someone to do something like the Charlottesville guy did," said David Stradley, a personal injury lawyer in Raleigh. "We just don’t need to be encouraging people to do something around a demonstration." Our ruling Cooper overstates what this bill would do. And legal experts say that, while untested, the bill doesn't appear to change litigation and might not offer any additional protections at all.


Viscosupplementation Recommended For Appropriate Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

Explanation: This news release from the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) describes a therapy called viscosupplementation that involves injecting hyaluronic acid, a gel-like fluid, that acts as a lubricant to alleviate pain in people with knee osteoarthritis. In this case the target audience is senior citizens. Because the subhead of the release describes it as a “New Scientific Statement” the ASSM might be forgiven for the medical jargon used throughout the release. This clearly wasn’t written for the general public. For example, the release doesn’t explain the term “viscosupplementation,” which is what this release is promoting. We hope health journalists take care when re-interpreting the language for the older Americans considering their many options for treating a common ailment like painful knees. The release offers no discussion on costs of viscosupplementation or insurance coverage restrictions. The benefit data is limited and there are no mention of harms. The article upon which this recommendation is based won’t be published until January 2016 which makes these limitations much more critical. Osteoarthritis of the knee is the most common form of arthritis and can be seen as a normal part of aging and of “wear and tear” of the body. It occurs most often in people over age 50 and more often in women than in men. It’s degenerative, getting worse over time. With the aging of the US population, especially considering the crush of baby boomers, the subject of how best to manage the pain and disability seen with osteoarthritis of the knee becomes important. While viscosupplementation has been available for many years, the majority of randomized clinical trials have not demonstrated a consistent or important benefit to either pain level or functionality from this therapy. A terse, vaguely worded and incomplete release does little to inform either the general public or the clinical community.

Association/Society news release,Pain management

Given the statistics on the incidence of osteoarthritis of the knee provided in the release, the cost of viscosupplementation is important. The costs of the material (technically, hyaluronic acid derivatives are medical devices) varies depending on which is chosen but costs range between $300 to $500 per injection. Since osteoarthritis of the knee is a chronic condition, the durability of the injection is an important aspect of costs. Clinical trials suggest that when it is effective, the duration is varied ranging from weeks to up to six months. According to the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons web page, an organization that does not specifically endorse viscosupplementation, “If the injections are effective they may be repeated after a period of time, usually 6 months.” The release is nearly silent on the quantification of benefits of viscosupplementation. It does state, “AMSSM RECOMMENDS viscosupplementation injections for Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grade II-III knee osteoarthritis in those patients above the age of 60 based on HIGH quality evidence demonstrating benefit using OMERACT-OARSI Responder Rating but the evidence should be downgraded due to indirectness for those under 60 years of age.” What exactly is the high quality evidence? How is it determined? Does it include functional as well and pain levels in the assessment? The reader is simply advised this is high quality evidence. There is also no mention of the longevity of any benefits from viscosupplementation. Does the lubrication, if it has a positive effect, last months or years? How many? There is also little in the way of qualification. Who best qualifies for this treatment? To its credit the release does note that this recommendation appears to fly in the face of all of the evidence from clinical trials. This fact is underscored by a statement from the first author, “We do not treat groups of people we treat individuals,” said Dr. Thomas Trojian, Lead Author and Past AMSSM Board of Director.” Randomized clinical trials are the recognized gold standard for medical interventions. Trials are designed to look at populations and not at individuals per se. All of these clinical trials are likely to have a group of responders to the intervention. In the case of failed trials, the group represents a subset. Since some people received a benefit, but the majority did not, this doesn’t seem like sound ground to stand on. It seems intuitive that injection of a solution into the joint space of the knee should have some downsides. Indeed, a 2012 meta-analysis of 89 clinical trials involving over 12,000 subjects published in Annals of Internal Medicine concluded, “In patients with knee osteoarthritis, viscosupplementation is associated with a small and clinically irrelevant benefit and an increased risk for serious adverse events.” Common side effects of short duration following viscosupplementation include swelling, and feelings of pain and warmth at the injection site. Serious but rare complications include infection, allergic reaction and bleeding. The quality of the evidence is limited to the few comments related to the “network meta-analysis.” We are not provided with any details on the methods, number of patients followed, what metrics were used to determine efficacy (other than the acronym) or how long people were followed. We’re not told why this is deemed a higher quality therapy for older people, just that it is. We’ll have to wait until the actual article is published in January 2016 to find out. The statistics provided are fairly consistent to what is given out by the NIH and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention so we see no disease mongering here. The information is being provided by the American Society for Sports Medicine, a multidisciplinary group of clinicians who specialize in sports medicine. There is a potential for an inherent bias. In case that needs spelling out the potential bias is that the association may be seeking new patients beyond its athlete patient base, and expanding into the aging population of “baby boomers” who have the greatest incidence of knee osteoarthritis. The release states that “people are more likely to show clinical improvement with viscosupplementation over placebo (saline) and intra-articular steroids. This is different than studies recently published that say the average response differs.” Unfortunately, the release doesn’t provide any data supporting that claim. Reviewers agreed that most every credible source of information on the management of osteoarthritis of the knee suggest a step-wise progression of treatments including weight reduction, braces, analgesics, and the like. While the release does mention steroid injections it does so dismissively. Weight loss and strengthening exercises are also mentioned as initial management recommendations, but are quickly glazed over because of “controversial” treatment aspects. What is controversial about current OA treatment? The viscosupplementation procedure may be available at many clinics nationwide. We don’t know so we are rating this Not Satisfactory. To be complete the release could have also noted that insurers place some important restrictions for payment and that  Medicare coverage may vary among states. Suggesting that viscosupplementation, which is not a new treatment, should be a mainstay of treatment based on the argument that some may benefit is certainly a novel (and a controversial) idea. That recommendation puts it at odds with what the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons says. Here’s what the AAOS has to say about viscosupplementation, “We cannot recommend using hyaluronic acid (HA) for patients with symptomatic OA of the knee,” with a “Strong” rating, based on supporting evidence from 3 high-quality and 11 moderate-quality research studies that met the inclusion criteria. We think the phrase “high quality evidence” was unjustified language in this release because there was no evidence provided. It’s nearly unheard of for a medical association to offer practice “guidance” or a specific treatment recommendation that changes practice without providing copious data to back up that recommendation.


A Japanese man was found dead months after being crushed by huge pile of pornography.

Explanation: Japanese national broadcasting company NHK tied the phenomenon to a society without bonds, where people have lost their connection to family, neighbors, and colleagues.

Uncategorized, daily mail, death, pornography

On 4 March 2017, several dubious news outlets reported that a Japanese man was killed when a six-ton pile of porn he had amassed in his apartment fell and crushed him. While it is true that a Japanese man died in his apartment amidst tons of pornography, the Japanese news website Nikkan Spa!, originally reported that he actually died of a heart attack. Further, despite reports that the man was not found for six months after his death, the Nikkan-Spa! simply reported that the unidentified man’s body was found a month later. Gruesomely, the story notes that the pornography soaked up his “body fluids,” which would normally cause an odor and alert neighbors of his death. “Although it is nightmare talk, this is reality,” the article says. The phenomenon of solitary deaths, or kodokushi, has been a concern in Japan since at least 2005:  According to the Japan Quality of Life Survey, conducted in 2013 by the Japanese government’s Economic and Social Research Institute, 32% of respondents reported that they were somewhat or very concerned about dying alone. According to our own analysis of the data, the worries are negatively correlated with subjective well-being. Worries about solitary death show one of the highest negative correlations with happiness.


Image depicts a tweet from the World Health Organization on January 14 2020, indicating there was "no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus.

Explanation: Did the World Health Organization Tweet That There Was ‘No Clear Evidence of Human-to-Human Transmission of the Novel #Coronavirus’ on January 14 2020?

After United States President Donald Trump announced that he had discontinued funding to the World Health Organization, and presidential advisor Kellyanne Conway subsequently blamed the COVID-19 pandemic on the group on April 15 2020, a tweet attributed to the WHO about a dearth of evidence supporting “human-to-human transmission” of what we now call COVID-19 began to be circulated in an apparent smear campaign:The tweet — which was timestamped January 14 2020 — read:Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #ChinaScreenshots of the sort appeared commonly in response tweets to news organizations such as the BBC and New York Times, along with claims the WHO was aware the purported tweet was inaccurate when it was published:They claimed it wasn’t spread from human-to-human on January 14.It also was grouped with other screenshots of the sort, in debates over who was at “fault” for the pandemic:Yeah it's Trump's fault. pic.twitter.com/AGOWeAdwpw— Steve in Burrowtown (@StevenCrowtown) April 7, 2020Typically, shares of the image suggested it showed that the World Health Organization was claiming there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus.The tweet itself was authentic and unaltered — but it was, in true disinformation form, presented with misleading and inaccurate context:Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China🇨🇳. pic.twitter.com/Fnl5P877VG— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) January 14, 2020What it said was the following, including an important distinction:Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China🇨🇳.Two days prior on January 12 2020, the WHO’s “Disease outbreak news” section included an alert titled “Novel Coronavirus – China,” which included what was at that point a very recent timeline of transmission:On 11 and 12 January 2020, WHO received further detailed information from the National Health Commission about the outbreak. […]Among the 41 confirmed cases, there has been one death. This death occurred in a patient with serious underlying medical conditions.China shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus on 12 January, which will be of great importance for other countries to use in developing specific diagnostic kits.The cluster was initially reported on 31 December 2019, when the WHO China Country Office was informed. The Chinese authorities identified a new type of coronavirus (novel coronavirus, nCoV), which was isolated on 7 January 2020. Laboratory testing was conducted on all suspected cases identified through active case finding and retrospective review. Other respiratory pathogens such as influenza, avian influenza, adenovirus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) were ruled out as the cause.According to information conveyed to WHO by Chinese authorities on 11 and 12 January, 41 cases with novel coronavirus infection have been preliminarily diagnosed in Wuhan City. Of the 41 cases reported, seven are severely ill. This is when the one death, mentioned above, was reported, in a patient with other underlying health conditions. Six patients have been discharged from hospital. Symptom onset of the 41 confirmed nCoV cases ranges from 8 December 2019 to 2 January 2020. No additional cases have been detected since 3 January 2020. […]According to the preliminary epidemiological investigation, most cases worked at or were handlers and frequent visitors to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The government reports that there is no clear evidence that the virus passes easily from person to person.Currently, no case with infection of this novel coronavirus has been reported elsewhere other than Wuhan.According to both the tweet and concurrent update, information was provided to the WHO by public health officials in China. Additionally, the “cluster” of infections was reported just under two weeks prior on December 31 2019, and what was then called “novel coronavirus, nCoV” was identified five days before the press release, on January 7 2020.In essence, that tweet represented a snapshot in time based on the information that was available at the time; it appeared just five days after SARS-CoV-2 was identified, and before that widespread nomenclature was in use. It was followed by a succession of information about COVID-19.The day before the tweet was published, the World Health Organization issued a “WHO statement on novel coronavirus in Thailand,” calling for outbreak preparedness outside China:The World Health Organization (WHO) is working with officials in Thailand and China following reports of confirmation of the novel coronavirus in a person in Thailand.The person was a traveler from Wuhan, China, and was identified by Thai officials on 8 January [2020], and hospitalized that day. The person is recovering from the illness according to Thai officials.The possibility of cases being identified in other countries was not unexpected, and reinforces why WHO calls for on-going active monitoring and preparedness in other countries. WHO has issued guidance on how to detect and treat persons ill with the new virus.On February 6 2020, a release (“WHO to accelerate research and innovation for new coronavirus”) announced that the WHO was “convening a global research and innovation forum to mobilize international action in response to the new coronavirus (2019-nCoV)”:This [meeting] will also fast-track the development and evaluation of effective diagnostic tests, vaccines and medicines, while establishing mechanisms for affordable access to vulnerable populations and facilitating community engagement.It was followed by an additional update on February 12 2020. WHO also maintained a regularly updated resource, “Rolling updates on coronavirus disease (COVID-19).” It began with the following entry, which linked to a January 5 2020 update titled “Pneumonia of unknown cause – China”:Pneumonia of unknown cause reported to WHO China Office 31 December 2019At the close of 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of a pneumonia of unknown cause, detected in the city of Wuhan in Hubei province, China. According to the authorities, some patients were operating dealers or vendors in the Huanan Seafood market.Staying in close contact with national authorities, WHO began monitoring the situation and requested further information on the laboratory tests performed and the different diagnoses considered.Several updates later, the WHO announced its first “field visit” to Wuhan:WHO makes field visit to Wuhan, China 21 January 2020The delegation observed and discussed active surveillance processes, temperature screening at Wuhan Tianhe airport, laboratory facilities, infection prevention and control measures at Zhongnan hospital and its associated fever clinics, and the deployment of a test kit to detect the virus.The delegation also discussed public communication efforts and China’s plan to expand the case definition for the novel coronavirus, which will build a clearer picture of the spectrum of severity of the virus.At the end of the visit, the Chinese Government released the primers and probes used in the test kit for the novel coronavirus to help other countries detect it. Chinese experts also shared a range of protocols that will be used in developing international guidelines, including case definitions, clinical management protocols and infection control.On January 30 2020, the WHO declared a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern”:Public Health Emergency of International Concern declared 30 January 2020WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared the 2019-nCoV outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, following a second meeting of the Emergency Committee convened under the International Health Regulations.Acknowledging that cases have been reported in five WHO regions in one month, the Committee noted that early detection, isolating and treating cases, contact tracing and social distancing measures – in line with the level of risk – can all work to interrupt virus spread.And on February 11 2020, the WHO disclosed a name for the illness caused by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19:🚨 BREAKING 🚨"We now have a name for the #2019nCoV disease:COVID-19.I’ll spell it: C-O-V-I-D hyphen one nine – COVID-19"–@DrTedros #COVID19 pic.twitter.com/Kh0wx2qfzk— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) February 11, 2020Ten days after COVID-19 was officially named, the WHO’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned a window of opportunity to avert a pandemic was closing:Countries with weaker health systems need the 🌍's focus & support now, due to the potential for #COVID19 to spread to those locations.We must take advantage of the window of opportunity we have to contain the outbreak. We don't want to look back later & regret failing to act.— Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) February 21, 2020The following day, the WHO Director-General and Regional Director for Africa “addressed an emergency meeting of ministers of health to agree on a continental strategy for Africa to strengthen preparedness and responses to the COVID-19 outbreak”:It’s great to see African leadership in action. Today’s meeting on #coronavirus convened by the @_AfricanUnion and attended by @WHO and partners is a powerful demonstration of collective political commitment to tackling #coronavirus pic.twitter.com/crsYAZlC1F— Dr Matshidiso Moeti (@MoetiTshidi) February 22, 2020Several updates occurred between that date and February 27 2020, when the WHO issued the following guidance — urging countries to mount a proactive response to the emerging pandemic:What every country should be asking itself 27 February 2020Discussing preparedness for COVID-19, the WHO Director-General listed questions every health minister should be able to answer. Here are a selection:• Are we ready for the first case? • Do we have enough medical oxygen, ventilators and other vital equipment? • How will we know if there are cases in other areas of the country? • Do our health workers have the training and equipment they need to stay safe? • Do we have the right measures at airports and border crossings to test people who are sick? • Do our labs have the right chemicals that allow them to test samples? • Are we ready to treat patients with severe or critical disease? • Do our hospitals and clinics have the right procedures to prevent and control infections? • Do our people have the right information? Do they know what the disease looks like?On March 2 2020, the WHO’s Director-General beseeched world leaders to focus on containing COVID-19, adding there was “no choice but to act now”:Our message to all countries is: this is not one-way street. We can push this #coronavirus back.Your actions now will determine the course of the #COVID19 outbreak in your country.There’s no choice but to act now. pic.twitter.com/osNPVas2Tr— Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) March 2, 2020A day after that, WHO warned of looming personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages the world over:On March 7 2020, WHO marked 100,000 cases of COVID-19 confirmed globally, and tweeted:Every country should urgently take all necessary measures to slow further spread and to protect health systems from becoming overwhelmed with patients seriously ill with #COVID19 https://t.co/4QQ7VcQPe4#coronavirus pic.twitter.com/mO1gBIzVGz— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) March 7, 2020Finally, on March 11 2020, the WHO officially classified COVID-19 as a pandemic:🚨 BREAKING 🚨"We have therefore made the assessment that #COVID19 can be characterized as a pandemic"-@DrTedros #coronavirus pic.twitter.com/JqdsM2051A— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) March 11, 2020The screenshot of a January 14 2020 WHO tweet — often accompanied by claims the organization “knew” and “did nothing” to stop COVID-19 — suggested that the organization maintained there was “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus.” For context, that tweet appeared five days after SARS-CoV-2 was identified, and the case count was low. The World Health Organization, in fact, preceded that statement with “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found …,” indicating their only information was secondhand. Finally, claims the WHO underestimated COVID-19 are implausible in light of its novel coronavirus timeline (date and timestamped), in which the organization repeatedly and with growing urgency implored world governments to contain the disease, before formally identifying a COVID-19 pandemic on March 11 2020.


The family of Anne Frank sought (and was denied) refugee status in the United States.

Explanation: Documents uncovered in 2007 revealed that Anne Frank's father, Otto Frank, desperately attempted to immigrate with his family to the United States.

Politics Immigration, anne frank, refugees, syrian refugee crisis

In November 2015, debate raged on social media networks regarding the escalating plight of Syrian refugees; during that time, a circulating rumor claimed Anne Frank was denied entry to the United States before her death in the Holocaust. While most Americans were familiar with Anne Frank (and many read her diary in school), the claim labeling her a prospective refugee seemed novel. Its appearance during an ongoing debate about Syrian refugees similarly prompted some skepticism among those who hadn’t before heard it, as Frank’s ordeal and death are a story with which so many are familiar. On 14 February 2007 The New York Times published an article titled “Letters reveal desperate plight of Anne Frank’s family,” reporting that documents newly uncovered by an accident of circumstance revealed the Frank family’s failed attempts at entry to the U.S.:  After lying undisturbed in a New Jersey warehouse for nearly 30 years, documents revealing the desperate efforts of Anne Frank’s family to escape to the United States and Cuba from Nazi-occupied Holland in 1941 have been discovered thanks to a clerical error. “I am forced to look out for emigration and as far as I can see U.S.A. is the only country we could go to,” Anne’s father, Otto, wrote to his college friend, Nathan Straus Jr., the head of the federal Housing Authority, a friend of Eleanor Roosevelt’s and the son of a Macy’s co-owner, asking him to put up a $5,000 bond. “It is for the sake of the children mainly that we have to care for. Our own fate is of less importance,” Otto Frank wrote. Page by page, the papers illustrate the tortuous process for gaining entry to the United States in those days. Even with powerful connections and money, European Jews could not overcome the State Department’s restrictions against refugees, said two Holocaust scholars who examined the documents. As the war in Europe intensified, so too did Otto Frank’s efforts to transport his family to safety. He ultimately settled on an attempt to enter through Cuba, a plan which never reached fruition:  By June 1941, no one with close relatives still in Germany was allowed into the United States because of suspicions that the Nazis could use them to blackmail refugees into clandestine cooperation. That development ended the possibility of getting the Frank girls out through a children’s rescue agency. Because of the uncertainty, Otto Frank decided to try for a single visa for himself. It was granted and forwarded to him on Dec. 1. No one knows if it arrived. Ten days later, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States and Havana canceled the visa. Reuters covered the discovery on 14 February 2007, including commentary from Holocaust scholars who lamented the family’s failed attempt at passage:  If her father had sought help sooner, “Anne Frank could be a 77-year-old woman living in Boston today, a writer. That is what the YIVO’s documents suggest,” said Richard Breitman, a professor at American University. However, Otto Frank decided to try to escape just as the Nazis were making it more difficult to leave and the United States was making it more difficult to enter, Breitman said. Cuba issued Otto Frank a visa on December 1, 1941, according to the documents, but it was canceled 10 days later when Germany declared war on the United States. A 2007 TIME article provided further details of Otto Frank’s increasingly desperate efforts:  For nine months, they tried to secure visas — first to the U.S. and then to Cuba — until that window shut. Just three letters of the file were written by Otto Frank, all addressed to university friend Nathan Straus Jr., son of a co-owner of Macy’s department store and head of the U.S. Housing Authority. Straus and Frank’s brother-in-law, Julius Hollander, regularly corresponded with two private Jewish agencies, the National Refugee Service in New York and the Boston Committee for Refugees. Straus also contacted the State Department on Frank’s behalf. Hollander and his brother arranged affidavits from their employers, Jacob Hiatt of E.F. Dodge Paper Box Co. and Harry Levine of the New England Novelty Co., both of Leominster, Mass. An April 2015 article titled “Op-Ed: Getting Anne Frank All Wrong” published to Arutz Sheva addressed the plight of Anne Frank and other Jewish refugee children who perished: Otto Frank, Anne’s father, dutifully filled out the small mountain of required application forms and obtained supporting affidavits from the family’s relatives in Massachusetts. But that was not enough for those who zealously guarded America’s gates against refugees. In fact, in 1941, the Roosevelt administration even added a new restriction: no refugee with close relatives in Europe could come to the U.S., on the grounds that the Nazis might hold their relatives hostage in order to force the refugee to undertake espionage for Hitler. That’s right: Anne Frank, Nazi spy. Anne’s mother, Edith, wrote to a friend in 1939: “I believe that all Germany’s Jews are looking around the world, but can find nowhere to go.”  On 4 September 2015, Anne Frank’s step-sister Eva Schloss drew direct parallels between the Syrian refugee crisis and the Jewish refugee crisis of World War II:  “You must not be selfish and you must share whatever you have and help in a desperate situation. They need help from you. “These people have had the courage to do a very difficult thing- to take your family and your whole life to another country requires bravery and strength. This is history repeating itself. “These Syrians are valuable, educated people. These are doctors and nurses who are only too willing to help our society and they will become leaders in the community if you let them.”  The claim that Anne Frank “was a refugee” confused some readers, as they hadn’t heard it prior to the Syrian refugee crisis. But the extent to which Otto Frank tried (and failed) to save his family from death during World War II was only first reported in 2007, and thus didn’t appear in many history lessons before that. Ultimately Frank perished (likely of typhus) at Bergen-Belsen in 1945, shortly after the deaths of her mother and sister Margot.


An official Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) badge page used badge number "14188" as its example (later deleted).

On July 3 2020, Twitter user Hayes Davenport shared a screenshot of a purported Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) example badge web page, featuring a badge with the number 14188:Unfortunate sample badge number choice in my opinion pic.twitter.com/AWmj1Gh2rV— Hayes Davenport (@hayesdavenport) July 3, 2020Davenport remarked “Unfortunate sample badge number choice in my opinion,” but did not initially explain the significance of the image further. In a subsequent tweet, Davenport linked to the page:https://t.co/J0ZkLkEYJl— Hayes Davenport (@hayesdavenport) July 3, 2020Badge Number 14188, and 1488 as a DogwhistleThe Anti-Defamation League (ADL) includes “1488” or “14/88” in its Hate Symbols Database. A short entry about the numbers as white supremacist code explains:1488 is a combination of two popular white supremacist numeric symbols. The first symbol is 14, which is shorthand for the “14 Words” slogan: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” The second is 88, which stands for “Heil Hitler” (H being the 8th letter of the alphabet). Together, the numbers form a general endorsement of white supremacy and its beliefs. As such, they are ubiquitous within the white supremacist movement – as graffiti, in graphics and tattoos, even in screen names and e-mail addresses, such as [email protected] Some white supremacists will even price racist merchandise, such as t-shirts or compact discs, for $14.88.The symbol is most commonly written as 1488 or 14/88, but variations such as 14-88 or 8814 are also common.We referenced that source in a June 29 2020 fact-check about a Trump store commemorative baseball, which was priced at $88:The Trump Store’s $88 BaseballA symbol with a similar history was spotted on shop.donaldjtrump.com (although without a reference to 1488 or 14/88):Is This ‘America First’ Trump 2020 Shirt Real?In September 2018, the number 1488 was spotted in a controversial Department of Health and Human Services apparent admission that it had “lost track” of “1,488” children (a number that was later revealed to be so wildly inaccurate as to be meaningless):1488, huh? 1488 lost children, from the camps? 1488 of 'em, you say. 1488. I see. https://t.co/rHdPlUzoCd— Cody Johnston (@drmistercody) September 20, 2018On February 15 2018, another reference appeared from DHS. This time, it was a fourteen-word-long title on a bizarre Department of Homeland Security memo that also bore a remarkable similarity to the neo-Nazi “Fourteen Words” trope that the number “14” references in such signaling. As the Anti-Defamation League pointed out:“14 Words” is a reference to the most popular white supremacist slogan in the world: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” The slogan was coined by David Lane, a member of the white supremacist terrorist group known as The Order (Lane died in prison in 2007). The term reflects the primary white supremacist worldview in the late 20th and early 21st centuries: that unless immediate action is taken, the white race is doomed to extinction by an alleged “rising tide of color” purportedly controlled and manipulated by Jews.Because of its widespread popularity, white supremacists reference this slogan constantly, in its full form as well as in abbreviated versions such as “14 Words”, “Fourteen Words,” or simply the number “14.”The “Fourteen Words,” again, is as follows:We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white childrenThe DHS memo’s fourteen-word title read:We Must Secure The Border And Build The Wall To Make America Safe AgainAt the time, Twitter users questioned whether the length of the title juxtaposed with the phrase “we must secure” was possibly accidental:This is an actual story on an official government website with a 14-word headline starting with "we must secure". This is not an accident. There are actual Nazis-who-call-themselves-Nazis at DHS. https://t.co/Q01TRRpNaI— Laurie Voss (@seldo) June 28, 2018An example of the use of “14/88” or “1488” as code can be seen here:Who Runs ‘Journalist Excellence Worldwide’?LAPDonline.org’s ‘14188 Badge’ Page Dates Back to At Least 2006As of July 6 2020, the link Davenport supplied led to this empty page. However, an archive of the page as it was displayed on July 3 2020 proved that the image accurately reflected the content of the page at the time of Davenport’s post:Moreover, the earliest archived version of the page we found was saved on May 8 2006:Before July 2020 brought press scrutiny, the example remained unchanged for more than a decade; it was published no later than May 2006.14/88 or 1488 Isn’t NewThe Southern Poverty Law Center’s Extremist Files’ entry for white nationalist David Lane attributes the authorship of “14 words” to him, and begins:A member of the terrorist group The Order, which was responsible for the 1984 assassination of Jewish radio host Alan Berg and many other crimes, Lane became even more of a movement icon after penning what rapidly became the best-known slogan of the U.S. white supremacist movement, the so-called “14 Words” (“We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.”). Sentenced to a total of 190 years for his crimes as a member of The Order, Lane spent his time in prison industriously pumping out racist tracts and other propaganda. After his death, a number of small memorial rallies were held in the United States and several European nations.In a section titled “Background,” the SPLC explains:David Lane was the Renaissance man of late 20th-century white nationalism. But the conspirator, writer, publisher, and theologian is best known on the radical right for coining the “14 Words,” a very popular white supremacist slogan: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.” Also popular is Lane’s “88 Precepts,” a list of statements on what he calls “natural law.” (Among neo-Nazis, because H is the eighth letter of the alphabet, 88 stands for “Heil Hitler.”) Lane was known for big proclamations. In his first trial, he told the court: “I do not recognize a government whose single aim is to exterminate my race. … I have given all that I have and all that I am to awake the people from their sleep of death.”The SPLC noted that Lane was imprisoned on charges related to the assassination of Berg in 1984. While in jail, Lane wrote many things — among them those “fourteen words.” In 1995, his wife created the 14 Word Press — indicating the code was well-established and in use in 2006:In prison, Lane wrote furiously, producing many articles for extremist journals with the overriding theme of racial survival. It was there that he authored the “14 Words” and “88 Precepts.” Always anxious to move beyond rhetoric, Lane wrote the article “Strategy,” in which he called for a group of white families to relocate to a remote country. There, they could breed Aryan children and take over the local political system, creating a haven where the white race could prosper. His numerous writings relentlessly targeted the Jews, Christianity, and law enforcement, which he considered “the most brutal and unthinking segment of the population.”To create an official outlet for his popular writings, Lane and wife Katja Lane, whom he married while in prison in 1994, established the 14 Word Press in 1995, dedicated to promotion of Lane’s racist ideology … Katja Lane ran the 14 Word Press, along with friend Ron McVan, out of her home in St. Maries, Idaho, for several years. But in 2001, she announced that she was handing over responsibility for the press to Steve Wiegand of Micetrap Distribution, a New Jersey-based hate-music producer. The press has since gone defunct.Lane’s entry concludes:Today, the doctrines of David Lane live on, embedded in the ideology of many white supremacist groups and called up regularly by the popular hate symbol 14-88 (where 14 stands for the 14 words and 88 stands for “Heil Hitler,” as noted above).SummaryOn July 3 2020, Hayes Davenport drew attention to a LAPDonline.org page (“LAPD Badge Description”), and the unexplained choice of the number “14188” for the “example badge. As of July 6 2020, the link provided by Davenport led to an empty page. Although appearances of the numbers 14, 88, and 1488 have escalated in recent years, the LAPDonline.org page was published no later than May 2006. At that time, the code was already common among white supremacists and white nationalists.Comments


Scientists grow viable vaginas from girls' own cells.

Explanation: Four young women born with abnormal or missing vaginas were implanted with lab-grown versions made from their own cells, the latest success in creating replacement organs that have so far included tracheas, bladders and urethras.

Follow-up tests show the new vaginas are indistinguishable from the women’s own tissue and have grown in size as the young women, who got the implants as teens, matured. All four of the women are now sexually active and report normal vaginal function. Two of the four, who were born with a working uterus but no vagina, now menstruate normally. It is not yet clear whether these women can bear children, but because they are menstruating, it suggests their ovaries are working, so it may be possible, said Dr Anthony Atala, director of Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center’s Institute for Regenerative Medicine in North Carolina. The feat, which Atala and colleagues in Mexico describe in the journal the Lancet, is the latest demonstration from the growing field of regenerative medicine, a discipline in which doctors take advantage of the body’s power to regrow and replace cells. In prior studies, Atala’s team has used the approach to make replacement bladders and urine tubes or urethras in young boys. Atala said the pilot study is the first to show that vaginal organs custom-built in the lab using patients’ own cells can be successfully used in humans, offering a new option for women who need reconstructive surgeries. All four of the women in the study were born with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome, a rare genetic condition in which the vagina and uterus are underdeveloped or absent. Conventional treatment generally involves the use of grafts made from intestinal tissue or from skin, but both tissues have drawbacks, says Atala, a pediatric urologic surgeon at Wake Forest. Intestinal tissue produces an excess of mucus, which can cause problems with odor. Conventional skin, meanwhile, can collapse. Atala said women with this condition usually seek treatment as teenagers. “They can’t menstruate, especially when they have a severe defect where they don’t have an opening,” he said. This can cause abdominal pain as menstrual blood collects in the abdomen. “It has nowhere else to go,” he added. Girls in the study were aged 13 and 18 at the time of the surgeries, which were performed between June 2005 and October 2008. The researchers started off by collecting a small amount of cells from genital tissue and grew two types of cells in the lab: muscle cells and epithelial cells, a type of cell that lines body cavities. About four weeks later, the team started applying layers of the cells onto a scaffold made of collagen, a material that can be absorbed by the body. They then shaped the organ to fit each patient’s anatomy, and placed it in an incubator. A week later, the team created a cavity in the body and surgically attached the vaginal implants to existing reproductive organs. Once implanted, nerves and blood vessels formed to feed the new organ, and new cells eventually replaced the scaffolding as it was absorbed by the body. “By the six-month time point, you couldn’t tell the difference between engineered organ and the normal organ,” Atala said. The team continued to monitor the young women, taking tissue biopsies, MRI scans and internal exams, for up to eight years from the initial implants. All of these tests showed the engineered vaginas “were similar in makeup and function to native tissue,” said Atlantida-Raya Rivera, director of the HIMFG Tissue Engineering Laboratory at the Metropolitan Autonomous University in Mexico City, where the surgeries were performed. Professor Martin Birchall of UCL Ear Institute in London, who wrote a commentary in the same journal, said the findings address some important questions about tissue-engineering, including whether tissue will grow as patients grow and whether an organ as large as the vagina can develop blood vessels when implanted in the body.


QuikTrip's Safe Place is equipped to provide a safe room and assistance to a variety of victims of violence or persons otherwise in danger.

Explanation: What's true: QuikTrip has long partnered with the separate Safe Place initiative, providing assistance to at-risk youth and runaways. What's false: QuikTrip and Safe Place are separate entities, and the former's locations do not have "safe rooms" or other hidden areas to conceal victims at immediate risk. QuikTrip employees are trained to contact shelters and locate other resources, but they are not necessarily equipped to act as first responders in complex situations involving sex trafficking or domestic violence.

Business, bad advice, facebook warnings, Policies

On 22 May 2016 a Facebook user published the above-reproduced photograph and text, reporting that QuikTrip convenience store chain operates a comprehensive program known as “Safe Place” which entails providing secure holding areas for any person in imminent risk of physical harm: This sign is posted at every QuikTrip. A “safe place” sign signifies that, if you are in any danger (domestic violence, sexual assault, lost children, sex trafficking, any fear for your safety) QuikTrip has a secluded and hidden area you can sit in until help arrives. Simply go in and tell any employee you are in need of a safe place. They are trained not to tell anyone you are there until the authorities arrive. Please share this for those who don’t know what these signs mean or how they can get out. You never know what someone is going through, and hopefully you will never need to find a safe place… but if so, now you know. The post implied that each and every QuikTrip location maintains a “secluded and hidden area” in which potential victims of violence could await help while safely secreted away from their attackers. The types of persons purportedly eligible for assistance by QuikTrip encompassed victims (or potential victims) of domestic violence, sex trafficking, or sexual assault, lost children, or anyone in “any fear for [their] safety.” In short, readers of that post would likely infer that should they ever find themselves in a  dangerous situation, the could be assured that the nearest QuikTrip location would be equipped to immediately deal with complex and possibly violent afety situations through the use of an on-site safe room. QuikTrip’s web site mentions the chain’s involvement with the separate Safe Place initiative on their “community” page. According to that information, the ancillary services offered by QuikTrip are a useful and an integral part of the chain: QuikTrip shares a vision of safe neighborhoods and communities. That’s why we’ve partnered with Safe Place to designate our stores as Safe Place sites for at-risk youth. Safe Place is a national nonprofit organization that provides safety for troubled or threatened youth. Since 1991, QuikTrip has been a designated Safe Place, where runaways and at-risk youth can come in off the street, receive food and drink, and wait for a volunteer from a Safe Place agency partner to connect them with professional help or a place to stay until their situation is resolved. In addition to our stores being Safe Place sites, QuikTrip provides grants to the local Safe Place agencies. We’re grateful for the valuable service Safe Place agencies and their volunteers provide. To learn more about Safe Place, visit nationalsafeplace.org. However, QuikTrip’s own page highlights their initiative as primarily serving “at-risk youth” and does not mention victims of domestic violence, sex trafficking, sexual assault, or anyone currently in fear for their safety. Moreover, the page makes no mention of a QuikTrip outlets’ operating hidden or secluded spots wherein those in imminent danger may be safely hidden away from possible attackers, nor their employing specially trained employees equipped to handle complicated situations of impending violence or serious criminal activity. We contacted QuikTrip’s media relations department to ask about the issue, and a company representative confirmed that QuikTrip indeed participates in the Safe Place initiative, and that participation in that program is part of QuikTrip employee training. He also indicated that the program is primarily geared toward runaways and other minors without homes or safe location at which to stay. After discussing the basics of that program we asked about other aspects of the program, primarily those pertaining to more severe criminal activity and people in immediate risk of danger (such as domestic violence or sex trafficking victims). He explained that individuals seeking QuikTrip’s Safe Place assistance generally wait “behind the counter” with an employee for help to arrive, and no “hidden and secluded” areas are available at any QuikTrip locations to hide those being chased by attackers. Moreover, he affirmed that the program specifically targets homeless and at-risk youth, not individuals in imminent danger due to partner violence or human trafficking. The latter class of victims are a concern, as their seeking safety at QuikTrip locations which lack facilities and resources to effectively deal with them could itself lead those persons into harm. A December 2014 Dallas Morning News article offers a more accurate description of the services QuikTrip is equipped to provide to at-risk youth, a description that may have served as the basis for the misleading information later circulated via Facebook: Plano-based City House is working with QuikTrip locations in Collin and Denton counties, which have the yellow Safe Place signs posted prominently at their stores. Youths needing help can go to a QuikTrip 24 hours a day, seven days a week and request help. QuikTrip employees will immediately contact City House, which always has someone on call and available to help. The organization can help youths who are runaways or homeless, who are abused or kicked out of the house, or who are in any unsafe situation. Youth can also text the word “SAFE” and their current location (address, city, state) to 69866 for immediate help nationwide. They will be provided with the closest Safe Place location. Although the QuikTrip Safe Place Facebook post includes some truthful and helpful aspects of QuikTrip’s involvement with the Safe Place program, the myriad inaccuracies it contains means those who take it literally might inadvertently be placed at further risk. It isn’t true that QuikTrip maintains safe rooms of any description for victims at risk of violence, and directing individuals who “fear for their (immediate) safety” to QuikTrip poses a danger not just to potential victims but to QuikTrip employees as well. Specific mentions of domestic violence and sex trafficking in particular conjure up images of people running and hiding from violent and threatening aggressors at QuikTrip outlets, but in almost all the dangerous situations listed in the Facebook post, (potential) victims would be best served visiting a police station rather than a convenience store.


Newport developed marijuana cigarettes which will be available for purchase "next year.

Explanation: This article appears to have been lifted from a previous (but almost identical) hoax story that Marlboro would soon be selling “Marlboro M” cannabis cigarettes in a signature green box.

In November 2016, the web site TMZWorldNews (formerly CelebtriCity) published an article reporting that the cigarette brand Newport planned to introduce marijuana cigarettes dubbed the “Newport Nirvana”: Reynolds American Inc. Chief Marketing Executive Lawrence Harrison, said in an interview that the company has been ecstatic on the idea of marketing cannabis, and has been monitoring the market for some time. It was only when the recent legalization initiatives — winning in Colorado and Washington — that the company finally made the decision to take part in the cannabis market. Harrison added that they have purchased thousands of acres of land to grow natural hemp. The tobacco company has been setting up a distribution process across North and South American territories, to streamline the supply lines. Like its fellow outlets (TMZWorldStar/TMZUncut/TMZBreaking),  TMZWorldNews is a fake news site appropriating the name of popular gossip site TMZ. None included a disclaimer warning readers its content consisted entirely of falsehoods. Prior fabrications from TMZWorldStar and related pages included claims a police officer shot a black baby after mistaking a pacifier for a gun, a penile implant could alert women to cheating romantic partners, a college student fell into a coma after participating in a social media semen-drinking challenge, KKK members committed suicide en masse due to the introduction of the Harriet Tubman $20 bill, a non-existent study proved 80 percent of black men in Atlanta were gay, and police found a satanic dungeon under a Chuck E. Cheese (a falsehood which bears striking resemblance to the late-2016 Pizzagate conspiracy theory).


Mammograms Save Lives for Women in Their 40s, Study Says

Explanation: The story focuses on results of a Swedish large study that showed a survival benefit from annual breast cancer screening for women in their 40s. This story also briefly reviews a recent study reported at the same conference, however, dealing with survival from breast cancer. Simply put, these are two separate issues (screening and survival) and it is very confusing to put the results and comments together in the same piece. Perhaps largely because the story doesn’t adequately evaluate the quality of the evidence of the new Swedish study, it has an unbalanced feel of promoting annual mammograms based on this recenty published data and via the selection of experts cited. The downsides of screening for women 40-49 are not discussed at all. While this story begins telling readers that "Another study…finds that screening can lower the risk of dying…" –  look at how other competing stories began:   4th paragraph of AP story: "The new study has major limitations and cannot account for possibly big differences in the groups of women it compares." 1st paragraph of LA Times blog story:  "Critics charged that the study was poorly designed and potentially vastly misleading." 2nd sentence of NY Times story:  "Results were greeted with skepticism by some experts who say they may have overestimated the benefit." No such skepticism, no such independent critical evaluation took place in the HealthDay story. Women – especially in their 40s – must be terribly confused by the swirling studies. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations last November, the American Cancer Society and others’ backlash against it, the Norwegian study in the New England Journal of Medicine, and now the new Swedish study. This is when journalism must rise to the challenge with an extraordinary effort to help evaluate evidence, ask tough questions, and offer insightful analysis. That just didn’t happen with this story. It was more like stenography from a teleconference. Disappointing.

The story does not discuss the costs of annual mammography screening, or even provide a range of costs. The story does not discuss any health care policy cost repercussions of breast cancer screening recommendations. The story does not discuss the cost of unnecessary biopsies or other treatments for women who have a false positive diagnosis via mammography (greater in women 40-49). The story does note the benefit of screening at age 40-44, 44-49 and for women 50 and older; however, only the relative benefit was given. The story should have reported the number of women in the cohort, who was screened, how long they were followed, and the absolute reduction in breast cancer mortality observed. That has been our standard all along on this site and this is no time to change. The story does a poor job discussing any harms of screening women starting at age 40. We are not told if women 40-44 had more false positive and unncessary biopsies ,or unncessary breast cancer surgery or treatments  for pre-cancerious lesions. We are also not told of the risks of additional radiation exposure on the risk future of breast cancers. We are not given the number needed to harm (NNH) for additional radiation exposure over 10 years of screening. The story tries to summarize the study and to put results in context with other recently published data. But we really expect more of an evaluation of the quality of the evidence than to just quote one of the authors saying he "could not pinpoint exactly why his findings differed from those of other studies" and that "he mentioned certain differences in methodology as a possible factor." What? That’s the end of the discussion? These are huge questions. There are many important methodological issues that could/should have been addressed and that WERE addressed by competitors’ stories (see our reviews of the AP, LA Times and NY Times stories.) There are many, many experts who could have been interviewed about research design who could have shed light on these concerns – and some of them were interviewed by competitors. Especially given the back and forth of competing studies (Norway last week, Sweden this week), readers need much more help navigating the evidence. This story just fell short of the mark. The story does provide the NNT (number needed to treat)  to place mortality risk in context here: i.e. screening 1,250 women five times over a 10-year period would save one life. The story cites independent sources, including the Swedish study author and chair of the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s communications committee, as well as other breast cancer researchers who found a benefit in screening younger women and a decline in breast cancer mortality. However, these sources do not  discuss the downsides of treatment. No one is cited to discuss the downsides of mass screening in a group where the risks may outweigh the benefits. Risks of screening low to average risk women in their early 40s include: overtreatment, false positive biopsies, anxiety, and in some cases, a fear and avoidance of future screening when mammography may be of greater benefit. Why not interview a member of the USPSTF to discuss their reaction to this recently published data? The USPSTF guidelines also do note that women at low-average risk discuss screening with their doctor. There is no mandate that women 40-49 not have access to annual screening. Quotes from both Dr. Jennifer Obel of ASCO and from study co-author Hakan Jonsson apparently came from an ASCO teleconference. There was no evidence of any independent research to find independent experts to comment on the study. The story does not discuss the option of NOT screening. It does quote Dr. Jennifer obel saying "While the optimal schedule of regular mammograms continues to be discussed by experts in the field, the critical message here is that all women starting at age 40 should talk to their doctor to understand the benefits and risks of screening and to understand what is best." But the story had already framed the new study as counter to the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations last November – yet this quote is almost the same thing that USPSTF recommended last Fall. ONLY because the story at least cited the USPSTF’s concerns aboutr screening in the 40s, we will give it a barely satisfactory score, because that at least implies there’s an option of foregoing screening. But we easily could have gone the other way with this criterion score as well. The story does not discuss availability of mammography, but such availability is really not in question. So this is judged not applicable because we can’t give it a satisfactory or an unsatisfactory score. The story just didn’t capture what was new and different and noteworthy about the way in which this research was done. Someone who’s not a journalist, Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society, still captured the "novelty" of the research succintly on his blog. He began his explanation, "There is a bit of a twist in the study which is important to understand." Indeed, you can read more about what’s important to understand and why on Dr. Len’s blog, because it wasn’t provided in this story. The answer gets at the heart of the methodology used – and whether it renders the research strong or questionable. The story does not appear to rely on a news release. However, it does appear to rely entirely on what was presented in a teleconference sponsored by the conference host organization. In the end, is that any different that relying on a news release? Was their any independent vetting of claims that took place? There’s no evidence of that. We’ll rule this not applicable.


Explanation: “Covfefe” is not a word, nor is it a Nazi, Israeli, or any other type of acronym. It has no meaning. The President clearly mistyped a tweet, which he later deleted.

On 31 May 2017 President Trump send a late-night tweet that began with a complaint about his press coverage and ended with the non-word “covfefe,” baffling many. While “covfefe” jokes proliferated, some began speculating that Trump had not accidentally flubbed the word “coverage,” but instead had been speaking either in code or Arabic. The #covfefe plot thickens: according to Google Translate, “Cov fe’fe” means سوف فقف “I will stand up” in Arabic. https://t.co/IhIUqQkc4u — Covfefe David Miles (@chrisdavidmiles) June 1, 2017  However, Google Translate brings up nothing at all for  “covfefe” in Arabic. Only by turning it into two words and adding an apostrophe — cov fe’fe — one can create a phrase that Google Translate says means “I will stand up.”   That’s a bit of a stretch — and it’s not even correct, Rasha Sharif, a linguist and language instructor at the DC-based International Center for Language Studies said. Sharif, who is fluent in multiple Arabic dialects, told us by email, “No, the word has nothing to do with the Arabic language.”  In fact, Arabic does not use a “V” sound, which already rules out covfefe or cov fe’fe as a word. Sharif says that she does not trust Google Translate, because anyone can edit the translations. “I found many words translated wrong in the Language tools,” she said. So how do you say “I will stand up” in Arabic? The nearest translation of the phrase is sa aqif or سأقف, Sharif told us. Variations: A separate rumor, this one published by The Marshall Report, held: Covfefe’ (pronounced “cuv – fee- fae”) is an Antediluvian term for “In the end we win.” It was commonly used by the sons of Adam to rail against the evil actions of the fallen who had led man astray. The term gained popularity prior to the great deluge and was rarely used after the flood subsided. It regained favor around the time Nimrod was building his tower, after which it was entirely lost in translation at Babel. The term “antediluvian” does not refer to a language, but a Biblical time period before the Flood. Needless to say, the writer, Dianne Marshall offered no proof for her claim. (The Marshall Report frequently uses “satirical” and fake articles as the bases for its posts.) Another rumor, posted to Facebook by one commenter and printed by the web site Godlike Productions held that word came from a Yiddish folktale about a rare butterfly:  A few people have asked me about President’s Trump’s tweet in which he used the word “covfefe.” Most people think he meant to write “coverage” and they have had quite a bit of fun with it, but actually it is a real word of Yiddish origin, meaning “a futile search” or “a pointless and false quest.” It was originally transliterated from the Hebrew as “kabfefe,” whose etymology is “kab”—relating to the mystical Qabalah—and “fefe,” which is a word for “butterfly.” What Trump was actually saying in Yiddish tweet-speak was, “We are doing great things despite the press’s negative and pointless search, aka fake news.” For those who are interested, the idea of “covfefe” comes from an old Yiddish tale about a foolish Sephardi rabbi who believed he was called to find and destroy the mythical and rare butterfly known as Benshariza, or “Lucifer butterfly”—a name that comes from “Helel ben Shahar,” meaning “shining star” (see Isaiah 14:12; also see Ephesians 2:2, where Satan is called the “prince of the power of the air”). The rabbi claimed that the Benshariza was recognizable by a unique and disturbing pattern on its huge wings, which looked like the moon and star symbol of the god Ba’al-Hadad. He was convinced that this ominous creature housed “the spirit of Satan” and that if he could destroy it, he would free the world of evil. We contacted Ben Kaplan, the Education Administrator at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, who told us by email, after consulting with colleagues:  The Yiddish language and literature scholars at the YIVO Institute confirm that “covfefe” is not a Yiddish word. (However, an anonymous source warns against whispering it three times in the dark, in a mirror, during a full moon.) Isaac L. Bleaman, a PhD candidate and Yiddish scholar at New York University’s Linguistics Department added:  It is obviously a typo for “coverage.” I see no clear (or even unclear) connection to Yiddish. As for the legend cited, if you Google the string “kabfefe” there are only 45 results and all are either typos, or related to the covfefe incident. Nothing found in Google Books. So chances are it was made up. The only Yiddish word “covfefe” brings to mind is kopveytik ‘headache,’ but that would not make sense in the context of the tweet, and it is not an especially common borrowing into Jewish English. So Trump probably has never heard the word, and certainly wouldn’t use it in his English. We know from Trump’s use of “schlonged” in 2015 (a verb that he took from the Jewish English word for ‘penis’ that ultimately derives from the Yiddish noun shlang ‘snake’) that his use of Yiddish borrowings can be rather idiosyncratic. But I don’t think this is one of those Yiddishisms. I’d sooner look for a Russian connection.


Health care systems to get $5.5M to prepare for emergencies.

Explanation: Rhode Island has been awarded $5.5 million in federal funding to ensure that its medical facilities and health care systems are prepared for natural disasters and public health emergencies.

Health, Rhode Island, General News, Public health, Jack Reed

U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat, announced the funding for the state Department of Health. The grants are administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Most of the money will be used to help hospitals and health care systems prepare for, and respond to, public health emergencies, such as disasters, terrorism, foodborne outbreaks and health epidemics. About $500,000 will go toward improving systems that track infectious diseases and detect and identify public health threats. Reed says this smart investment will help ensure the health department and hospitals respond quickly and effectively when a major disaster strikes.


Cristina Higgins authored a personal account about the spread of COVID-19 in Italy.

Explanation: And finally for those who say that this is just something that happens to old people, starting yesterday the hospitals are reporting that younger and younger patients – 40, 45, 18, are coming in for treatment.

On March 10, 2020, Facebook user Cristina Higgins posted a message from Bergano, Italy, or as she described it the “heart of the coronavirus crisis.” Higgins’ post described how the country was dealing with the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus, and claimed that “the news media in the US has not captured the severity of what is happening here.” Many Snopes readers inquired about Higgins’ post, which racked up more than a half-million shares within two days, so we have reproduced it in full at the end of this article, and we’ll address a few of the claims made in the post. But first let’s verify that Higgins is the author of this post and that she truly lives in Italy. Attribution on the internet can be a difficult thing. Facebook posts like this are often copied, pasted, and spread across social media where they get attributed to a variety of sources. An unattributed version of this post, for instance, was viewed more than 100,000 times after it was posted to Imgur. Higgins does appear to be the true author of this post, however. NBC News contacted her after the post went viral and reported that she is an American currently living in Italy. NBC News writes: For nearly two weeks, Cristina Higgins, an American who lives in Italy, has traveled no farther from her apartment building than the driveway. Her days begin at the breakfast table with her husband and three children before the kids log online to do their schoolwork from home. The family spends their evenings playing Monopoly in their apartment. […] “We have friends who are getting sick. It’s very stressful,” Higgins told NBC News over the phone from her home in Bergamo, where she, like everyone else, is under government-ordered home isolation, even though she and her family are not sick. “I am nauseous all day long, because every time I look at the news or talk to somebody else, something terrible has happened. And I don’t know what’s going to happen next.” […] Higgins said she rarely posts to Facebook but felt it was important to convey to those outside of Italy who can’t comprehend how bad the situation is that they need to do whatever they can to not pass on the disease. Higgins appears to be the true author of this post. Furthermore, the claims she made in the post, generally speaking, are accurate. Let’s examine a few of her assertions. While COVID-19 has been compared to the flu and has similar symptoms, Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told the House Oversight and Reform Committee that COVID-19 was at least “10 times as lethal” as the seasonal flu. Here’s a clip of Fauci’s testimony: We transcribed the relevant portion below: For the practical understanding of the American people, the seasonal flu that we deal with every year has a mortality of 0.1%. The stated mortality overall of this [coronavirus], when you look at all the data including China, is about 3% […]. If you count all the cases of minimal symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, that probably brings the mortality rate down to 1%. Which means that it is 10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu. In general, yes. Italy has restricted public gatherings and travel for all 60 million of its residents. Nonessential businesses such as restaurants and bars have been closed, and the country is encouraging social distancing. Food stores and pharmacies are about the only businesses that will be allowed to stay open until restrictions are lifted. CNN reported: Italy has imposed sweeping nationwide restrictions on travel and public life, a desperate attempt to contain the coronavirus outbreak that looks set to plunge the world’s eighth largest economy into a steep recession. The measures announced late Monday include travel restrictions on 60 million residents, a ban on public events, the closure of schools, movie theaters, museums and gyms, and limits on opening hours for restaurants, bars and shops. The government took action as the number of deaths caused by coronavirus reached 463 and infections topped 9,000, more than double the number reported in China as a share of the population. The restrictions are in place until at least April 3. One major concern about a viral outbreak is that there won’t be enough beds and supplies to treat sick people. Although Italy may have adequate space to treat people during a normal year, hospitals can become overwhelmed when there is a surge of patients. That is currently the case in Italy. Vox reports: The coronavirus has overwhelmed the country’s health system, particularly in the north. More than 80 percent of the hospital beds in Lombardy, the hardest-hit province, are being occupied by coronavirus patients, according to Bloomberg. Intensive care units are overloaded while elective surgeries have been canceled in the process to free up beds. Stories abound on social media about doctors struggling to meet their patients’ needs, even rationing care. Although older generations are certainly at higher risk of dying from this disease, young people are not immune to COVID-19. The CDC writes that “infections in children have been reported, including in very young children.” While many younger people may have a strong enough immune system to survive the disease, they can catch it, carry it, and spread it to more people. The Verge writes: Most people who are young or healthy and who contract the virus don’t get severely ill. But if you have the virus, even if you don’t get that sick, you might come into contact with people who are more at risk — and pass the virus to them. That’s why it’s so important to stay home if you’re not feeling well. Minimizing the number of people each sick person infects is low-tech, but it’s the best way to slow the spread of a disease like COVID-19. It’s the goal of policies like school closures and event cancellations and why people who might have been exposed to the illness are asked to isolate themselves. For reference, here is the full text of Higgins’s Facebook post: I am writing to you from Bergamo, Italy, at the heart of the coronavirus crisis. The news media in the US has not captured the severity of what is happening here. I am writing this post because each of you, today, not the government, not the school district, not the mayor, each individual citizen has the chance, today to take actions that will deter the Italian situation from becoming your own country’s reality. The only way to stop this virus is to limit contagion. And the only way to limit contagion is for millions of people to change their behavior today. If you are in Europe or the US you are weeks away from where we are today in Italy. I can hear you now. “It’s just a flu. It only affects old people with preconditions” There are 2 reasons why Coronavirus has brought Italy to it’s knees. First it is a flu is devastating when people get really sick they need weeks of ICU – and, second, because of how fast and effectively it spreads. There is 2 week incubation period and many who have it never show symptoms. When Prime Minister Conte announced last night that the entire country, 60 million people, would go on lock down, the line that struck me most was “there is no more time.” Because to be clear, this national lock down, is a hail mary. What he means is that if the numbers of contagion do not start to go down, the system, Italy, will collapse. Why? Today the ICUs in Lombardy are at capacity – more than capacity. They have begun to put ICU units in the hallways. If the numbers do not go down, the growth rate of contagion tells us that there will be thousands of people who in a matter of a week? two weeks? who will need care. What will happen when there are 100, or a 1000 people who need the hospital and only a few ICU places left? On Monday a doctor wrote in the paper that they have begun to have to decide who lives and who dies when the patients show up in the emergency room, like what is done in war. This will only get worse. There are a finite number of drs, nurses, medical staff and they are getting the virus. They have also been working non-stop, non-stop for days and days. What happens when the drs, nurses and medical staff are simply not able to care for the patients, when they are not there?


Facebook post Says series of 11 photos are “from the 1918 flu pandemic.”

Explanation: Five of the 11 photos are from the 1918 flu pandemic. Six are not.

Health Care, Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,

Women in gas masks, others with bags on their heads and stay at home posters. If posts on social media are to be believed, these images and more come from the 1918 flu pandemic. "Photos from the 1918 flu pandemic," proclaimed one such recent Facebook post that contained 11 photos. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) PolitiFact conducted reverse image searches to determine the origins of the photos. Of the 11 photos, six bear no connection to the 1918 flu pandemic. Let’s take a look at those first. The first photo features two women with what look like bags over their heads. According to the Associated Press, it was captured in November 1953. "War surplus gas capes are used by Meriel Bush, left, and Ruth Neuer, in an attempt to dodge the eye-stinging effects of a low-hanging smog and smoke which enveloped Philadelphia for the second straight day," reads the AP’s caption. A reverse image search located the image of masked women walking arm in arm on a stock photo website. On the site, the photo is described as, "Ladies' fashion from 1913. New veil fashions, based on Turkish nose veils." When debunking claims that the photo was of the 1918 flu pandemic, AFP Fact Check’s bureau in Thailand contacted the German photo agency, Süddeutsche Zeitung Photo, which was listed as the photographer. "The original picture description says that the nose veils were the fashion for ladies after the Balkan war," Süddeutsche Zeitung’s spokesperson told AFP in an email. The Balkan Wars unfolded from 1912 to 1913. A photo of women in gas masks tending to a stroller is from a June 1941 gas test during World War II, according to Getty Images. "9th June 1941: A gas masked young mother attends to her child's pram gas mask during a surprise gas test in Kingston," reads the Getty Images photo description. One of the images from the post is an advertisement for a Bell Telephone Co. "People who are in quarantine are not isolated if they have a Bell Telephone," the ad reads. Back in May, Snopes.com debunked the claim that this ad was connected to the 1918 pandemic. Versions of this ad existed as early as November 1910. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran an ad that was nearly identical, but with a different tag, "The Bell Telephone Company of Missouri." The ad mentions "quarantine" and "the sick," but there is no indication it is a direct reference to any particular illness. An image of an ad that encouraged people to stay home was created not in 1918, but in 2020. "Stay At Home," the ad says. "It has never been easier to save lives." Though the graphic illustration may appear vintage, it was made in March in response to the current COVID-19 pandemic. A French illustrator named Mathieu Persan made versions of the poster in various languages and posted them on Twitter. If you look closely, you can see his signature on the right side of the illustration. A photo of two women who appear to be visiting over a car window while wearing masks was taken in 1929, during a separate flu epidemic. "Two women wearing flu masks during a flu epidemic in 1929," reads Getty Images’ photo description. The 1928-29 flu epidemic was studied by health professionals using data from the 1918 pandemic. Here’s what we can tell you about the five photos that are actually from the 1918 influenza pandemic time period. A reverse image search identified a photo of a woman wearing a mask as a Getty Images stock photo from February 1919. "A woman wearing a flu mask during the flu epidemic which followed the First World War," reads Getty Images’ caption. A photo showing a sign on a streetcar proclaims, "Spit spreads death." A reverse image search revealed the New York Times had used this photo as a feature image for a story about the 1918 flu. Crediting the photo to the Historical Medical Library of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia, the Times caption reads, "An anti-spitting sign posted on streetcar in Philadelphia, October 1918." An image shows rows of beds used for treating flu patients from the 1918 pandemic, according to Getty Images. The photo was featured in Wired and Business Insider stories about the visuals from the 1918 flu pandemic. "All theatres closed until further notice at request of mayor," reads a sign behind a young boy. The photo was used in a story published by the Seattle Times in July. Credited to the Museum of History & Industry, the Times’ caption reads, "A masked newsboy looks west outside the closed Pantages Theatre box office during the influenza pandemic of nearly 102 years ago. Likely, the photo was taken between Oct. 5 and Nov. 11, 1918." It was also used in the museum’s webinar about the 1918 pandemic. And a news announcement with a Red Cross nurse wearing a mask is legitimately from 1918, according to The Washington Post and The Guardian. "A Red Cross nurse wears a gauze mask over her nose and mouth in this 1918 imaged published in the Illustrated Current News of New Haven, Conn.," the Washington Post reported in its description of the photo. A Facebook post claims 11 photos are "photos from the 1918 flu pandemic." This is not the case. Five of the 11 photos are from the 1918 influenza pandemic time period; six are not.


Proposal for Lyme prevention included in appropriations deal.

Explanation: Maine’s Republican senator is proposing a law change that she believes will help improve prevention of tick-borne diseases such as Lyme disease.

Appropriations, Health, General News, Ticks, Legislation, Lyme disease, Susan Collins, Kay Hagan, Tina Smith, Maine

Sen. Susan Collins and Democratic Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota announced on Dec. 16 that legislation they wrote to improve research, prevention, diagnostics and treatment for the diseases has been included in the federal appropriations agreement. The senators are calling the proposal the Kay Hagan Tick Act, after former Sen. Kay Hagan, who died in October due to complications suffered from Powassan virus. Powassan, like Lyme, is a tick-borne infection. The proposal would make several changes, such as requiring the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to develop a national strategy to combat the diseases. It would also authorize the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to provide $20 million in grants per year to state health departments to improve data collection and make others changes. The appropriations agreement was headed to President Donald Trump for signature late Thursday.


New hearts forge new friendship for transplant recipients.

Explanation: A suburban Detroit woman and South Side Chicago man are recovering in a Chicago hospital following rare triple transplant surgeries that gave them the healthy heart, liver and kidney each needed — and a new friendship they never expected.

AP Top News, Chicago, Health, Michigan, North America, Organ transplants, Friendships, U.S. News

University of Chicago Medicine doctors announced Friday that they successfully completed the triple organ transplants on Sarah McPharlin, a 29-year-old woman of Grosse Pointe Woods, Michigan, and Daru Smith, a 29-year-old father from Chicago’s South Side, within 30 hours of one another. McPharlin had two transplants canceled earlier in the year, pushing her surgery back. “Maybe because it’s only luck that both of those transplants were supposed to be at the same time,” Nir Uriel, the director of heart failure, transplant and mechanical circulatory support for the hospital, said at a news conference Friday. University of Chicago Medicine has performed the most heart-liver-kidney transplants in the world. Just eight minutes after a medical team finished Smith’s liver transplant on Dec. 20, hospital staff learned that donor organs were available for McPharlin. Smith, who finished surgery that day, became only the 16th person in the U.S. to undergo a heart-liver-kidney transplant and hours later on Dec. 21 McPharlin became the 17th. Each surgery required a 22-person team, with some staffers working on both patients. The hospital also performed five other organ transplants during that time period. Smith and McPharlin, who had her first heart transplant at the age of 12, arrived at the Chicago hospital in November. But neither knew they were both seeking a triple transplant when they first met during pre-therapy sessions ahead of surgery. The sessions were quiet and patients didn’t share details about their transplants. But McPharlin’s mother, who quit her job as a school teacher in Michigan to be with her daughter for treatment, pried out of Smith that he was awaiting the same organs as McPharlin. “It’s been mind-blowing and amazing, having someone go through the process with me, gave me more motivation,” Smith, a truck driver, said during a video interview at the hospital Friday. The pair, who are recovering on the same hospital floor, share walks and give each other high-fives when they pass one another in the hallways. Their families are already planning a dinner together in the city once the two are released and feeling better. Nurses say they notice a difference in recovery for the two compared to other transplant patients, because they have gone through the same unusual and debilitating surgery together. McPharlin and Smith notice too. “It was so cool to know we would be able to see each other progress together,” McPharlin, an occupational therapist, said Friday. “It was really cool to see how Daru was getting up in the hall and I knew eventually, or pretty soon, I would be doing the same.”