Explanation: Rebecca Quigley said, "Once a woman enters into the sex trade, her average life expectancy is seven years." She — like many others on the Internet — are incorrectly quoting a FBI budget report that only deals with child prostitution and offers no documentation. And the FBI is now trying to set the record straight. There’s little doubt that prostitution can be one of the most dangerous endeavors undertaken by a woman. But the seven-year claim is flat out False. (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)

Rhode Island, Children, Crime, Public Health, Public Safety, Recreation, Sexuality, Women, Workers, Rebecca Quigley,

Amid a growing awareness that sex trafficking is a problem in Rhode Island, the public access program "State of the State" broadcast a discussion of the issue. During the show, host Rebecca Quigley offered several statistics about sex workers. One in particular caught our ear. "Once a woman enters into the sex trade," she said, "her average life expectancy is seven years, with AIDS and homicide as the top killers." So if a 18-year-old woman starts working as a prostitute, she's likely to be dead by age 25? We decided to check out that provocative statistic. We found the claim echoed in many sites on the Internet, including Ohio Catholic Conference, The Straight Dope, CNN and others. In contrast, we located a 2004 study in the American Journal of Epidemiology that used 33 years of data to examine the lives of female prostitutes in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Nearly 2,000 were ultimately tracked. Some had been in the business for a few years, others for much longer. The researchers found that fewer than 8 percent died over the three decades. When we tracked down the authors, they said the actual life expectancy, like so many statistics used in the prostitution debate, isn't really known. But, they said, it's not seven years. "If you had a life expectancy that short, you'd have difficulty replenishing the pool with new prostitutes," said coauthor Devon D. Brewer, who directs Interdisciplinary Scientific Research, a Seattle-based research and consulting firm. "It's tough to put into words how dramatic an overstatement that is. There's zero basis that I'm aware of for making statements like that." "The truth is, the vast majority of women who enter into prostitution leave the trade alive, so to say a life expectancy of seven years . . . There is no basis for anything that incredibly dramatic," he said. "That's a statement that gains credence because it's repeated so often and it perhaps has very little to do with reality," said chief author John J. Potterat, now retired from the El Paso County Department of Health and Environment in Colorado Springs. When we heard back from Quigley, she cited several sources we had seen that made the same claim, including an article from Emergency Physicians Monthly that traced a variant of the claim to Melissa Farley, clinical psychologist, founder and director of Prostitution Research and Education, based in San Francisco. She's an anti-prostitution activist. Farley told us that, although she's heard the statistic, she's never seen any documentation to back it up. What is true, the experts all agreed, is that prostitution is a very dangerous profession. The fact that the seven-year statistic is wrong, said Brewer, the Seattle scholar, "doesn't take away from the fact that the risk of death that prostitute women face is higher than any other set of women ever studied, at least the risk of homicide. Does that mean most prostitutes are getting killed? No. It means compared to other women in other professions it's the one you're mostly likely to be murdered in." Brewer and his colleagues estimated that the women they studied faced a 1 percent chance of being murdered during their prostitution career. That murder rate, by the way, has also spawned another bogus statistic — that prostitutes typically die around age 34. What Brewer, Potterat and their colleagues actually found was that among the 21 prostitutes in their study who were murdered, their average age when they died was 34. As retired call girl Maggie McNeill noted last year in the Washington Post, to say that's "the average life expectancy of all street workers, or of all sex workers . . . would be analogous to saying that because the average soldier who is killed in battle is 21 years old, the average man who joins the military dies at 21." Quigley's best source supporting her claim — and one we found as well — was the FBI. In an FBI document titled "FY 2011 Budget Request At A Glance," the bureau asks for $333 million and 831 positions to fight child exploitation. The fact sheet claims, "Studies estimate between 200,000 and 300,000 children are being forced into prostitution at any given time in the United States. The average age of a new child prostitute is 13, and the life expectancy after becoming a child prostitute is 7 years." No source is cited. We couldn't find another FBI document that repeated the seven-year claim. So the FBI was only talking about child prostitution, not prostitution in general. And when we contacted the FBI, the agency repudiated the statistic. Spokesman Christopher M. Allen said that after checking with the bureau's Violent Crimes Against Children Section, it appears that the seven-year life expectancy claim may have come from a case the FBI handled, one that involved several victims. "It should not be considered a general statement of FBI findings," Allen wrote in an email. Our ruling Rebecca Quigley said, "Once a woman enters into the sex trade, her average life expectancy is seven years." She — like many others on the Internet — are incorrectly quoting a FBI budget report that only deals with child prostitution and offers no documentation. And the FBI is now trying to set the record straight. There’s little doubt that prostitution can be one of the most dangerous endeavors undertaken by a woman. But the seven-year claim is flat out . (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)


A warning about a chemical   called benzene that is linked to cancer such as leukemia .  The   warning says that benzene can build up inside parked automobiles and   suggests that drivers roll down   their windows to ventilate the car’s interior prior to switching on   the air conditioner.

Explanation: Harmful Levels of Benzene Build Up in Parked Automobiles

Benzene is a harmful chemical that can exist both   inside vehicles and in the open air but warnings such as this eRumor about airing out your car interior   may be overblown. The American Chemical Society released a report in 2007 saying that   the interiors of motor vehicles were found to contain of  a “wide   variety of synthetic materials, which emit volatile organic compounds.”    The investigation concluded that there was no indication of the   emissions being any sort of “apparent health hazard of parked motor   vehicle indoor air.”   Click for report. Benzene comes from   coal and petroleum products and is one   of the most commonly made chemicals in the United States. It is a colorless liquid with a sweet   smell that evaporates when it makes contact with the air. Benzene   is present in cigarette smoke, car exhausts, and can also be found in glues and   paints, according to the Center   for Disease Control (CDC). The   CDC   Fact Sheet on Benzene says, “Breathing in unusually high doses of   benzene can cause difficulty in thinking, changes in heart function,   unconsciousness, or death. In smaller amounts over longer periods of   time, benzene can also decrease the formation of blood cells. Benzene is   considered to be a cancer-causing chemical.”   Exposure   to benzene can come from consuming contaminated food or beverages but   most people come into contact with it by breathing it in the air. The   CDC says, “Benzene gets into the air from forest fires, car emissions,   gasoline vapors, and tobacco smoke. People who work with petroleum   products, including gasoline, are exposed to benzene by touching or   breathing in the chemical.”  This warning   might have been sparked by a report from almost decade ago by Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research   Organization (CSIRO). In a  December 19, 2001 report, the organization found “high levels of air   toxic emissions in new motor vehicles for up to six months and longer   after they leave the showroom.” That research, however was conducted on   three automobiles manufactured in Australia and one imported vehicle,   the origin of which was not revealed. updated 04/29/10 Comments


Women who quit hormone therapy still live with cancer risk

Explanation: This story reports on an article published in this week’s Journal of the American Medical Association. The article presents follow-up data from the landmark Women’s Health Initiaive on the risks and benefits of hormone therapy. The new data shows that at three years after stopping hormone therapy, there was no increased risk of heart disease in the hormone therapy group, however the increase in breast cancer risk did persist at three years. The story does not provide adequate details about alternatives to hormone therapy for menopausal symptoms or about lower-hormone options that could potentially confer less risk. The story does not quantify the risks of hormone therapy, in absolute terms or otherwise. This is particularly important for this subject because the risks involved are realtively small. For example, in the study, the risk of breast cancer was less than one half of one percent per year in the hormone therapy group. Furthermore, other than to describe the study as "sweeping", the story does not adequately describe the strength of the new evidence. Most importantly, the story does not explain that these findings do not necessarily apply to younger women who take hormone therapy for shorter periods of time. Overall, in focusing solely on the risks of hormone therapy, this story implies that it is not a reasonable choice for women. In reality, when taken by women who are actively experiencing symptoms for short periods of time, hormone therapy is safe and effective.

There was no discussion of the costs involved with hormone replacement therapy although, with a story about risks of HRT, it is somewhat understandable that a discussion of costs was not vital. The story does not quantify the risks of hormone therapy, in absolute terms or otherwise. This is particularly important for this subject because the risks involved are relatively small. For example, in the study, the risk of breast cancer was less than one half of one percent per year in the hormone therapy group. The story mentions blood clots, breast cancer, and heart attack as risks of hormone therapy. Other than to describe the study as "sweeping" the story does not adequately describe the strength of the new evidence. Most importantly, the story does not explain that these findings do not necessarily apply to younger women who take hormone therapy for shorter periods of time. The story does not engage in disease mongering. The story quotes more than one expert. The story briefly mentions that "many women taking HRT are getting a treatment which is considered safer, often at half the dose and only for a couple of years" but that gives the viewer little information about what that option is or how much safer it may be. Clearly hormone therapy is available. Clearly hormone therapy is not a new idea. Because the story quotes multiple experts, the viewer can assume the story did not rely on a press release as the sole source of information.


World must prepare for inevitable next flu pandemic, WHO says.

Explanation: The world will inevitably face another pandemic of flu and needs to prepare for the potential devastation that could cause, and not underestimate the risks, the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Monday.

Outlining a global plan to fight the viral disease and get ahead of a potential global outbreak, the WHO said the next influenza pandemic “is a matter of when, not if”. “The threat of pandemic influenza is ever-present,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director-general, said in a statement. “We must be vigilant and prepared – the cost of a major influenza outbreak will far outweigh the price of prevention.”  The world’s last flu pandemic was caused by the H1N1 virus, which spread around the world in 2009 and 2010. Studies of that pandemic found that at least one in five people worldwide were infected in the first year, and the death rate was 0.02 percent. Global health experts and the WHO warn there is a risk that a more deadly flu virus will one day jump from animals to people, mutate and infect many hundreds of thousands of people. Flu viruses are multiple and ever-changing, and they infect around a billion people every year around the world in seasonal outbreaks. Of those infections, around 3 to 5 million are severe cases, leading to between 290,000 and 650,000 seasonal flu-related respiratory deaths. Vaccines can help prevent some cases, and the WHO recommends annual vaccination - especially for people working in health care and for vulnerable people such as the old, the very young and people with underlying illness. The WHO plan - which it described as its most comprehensive to date - includes measures to try to protect populations as much as possible from annual outbreaks of seasonal flu, as well as prepare for a pandemic. Its two main goals, the WHO said, are to improve worldwide capacities for surveillance and response - by urging all governments to develop a national flu plan, and to develop better tools to prevent, detect, control and treat flu, such as more effective vaccines and antiviral drugs.


Health Care, Florida, Americans for Prosperity,

Florida’s closely watched U.S. Senate race pits incumbent Republican Marco Rubio against Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy. Recently, Rubio got some help from the free-market group Americans for Prosperity, which created an ad attacking Murphy as "Pay-More Patrick." One of the claims in the ad was an attack on Murphy’s support for the Affordable Care Act, a law sometimes called Obamacare after the president who signed it into law. In the ad, a narrator says, "Patrick Murphy says he wants to serve in the U.S. Senate, but who does he really want to serve? As a member of Congress, ‘Pay-More’ Patrick has voted for big payouts to special interests. Our health care premiums are going up, and 300,000 Floridians have lost their health insurance. And yet, ‘Pay-More’ Patrick voted not once, not twice, but nine times for Obamacare." Here, we’ll check the assertion that "300,000 Floridians have lost their health insurance" as a result of Obamacare. Where the number came from The 300,000 figure has a long history. As we have noted previously, it stems from the 300,000 policyholders in October 2013 who received notices from the insurance company Florida Blue that their insurance plans didn’t meet the new rules under the Affordable Care Act. Those rules were intended to phase out "bare bones" plans that didn’t include features like prescription drug coverage or hospital stays. Florida Blue sent those 300,000 customers letters informing them that their plans would end and offering guidance on how to get signed up for a new plan. "Florida Blue is proactively communicating to these members to help them understand how this transition affects them," the company said at the time. "Prior to their 2014 renewal date, each member will receive a letter that instructs them to contact Florida Blue to review their migration options. These new plans will offer members access to more comprehensive benefits in 2014." Opponents of the Affordable Care Act seized on the 300,000 number as a sign of problems for the newly implemented law, and it became an issue during the 2014 campaign cycle. Twice, we took issue with the use of the statistic for not providing full context about the number. Rubio himself earned a rating for saying, "300,000 people are going to lose their individual coverage because of Obamacare. Now those people next year, they don’t have health insurance." Since the company provided assistance with switching plans, we argued that Rubio was jumping the gun by saying flatly that they wouldn’t have insurance. What has happened since? So what happened to those 300,000 people in the succeeding three years? As it turns out, the vast majority of the 300,000 found coverage -- with Florida Blue. "More than 80 percent of the approximately 300,000 members remained with Florida Blue," company spokesman Paul C. Kluding told PolitiFact. That would leave at most 60,000 people -- not 300,000 -- who lost their health insurance as a result of that provision of the law. But even that number is probably high. Remember, the 80 percent figure refers to the policyholders who remained with Florida Blue. But the other 20 percent didn’t necessarily become uninsured -- they just didn’t get a Florida Blue plan. They could have found another private plan, or they could have found other private insurance -- including a plan purchased on one of the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces. So at the very least, the ad reanimates a years-old number that was known to be preliminary and in flux. Florida’s new insurance signups The use of the 300,000 number is misleading in a second way: It ignores the coverage gains of the Affordable Care Act in the state. More than 1.7 million Floridians purchased plans through the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces between Nov. 1, 2015, and Feb. 1, 2016. And the number affected by the law could have been many more if Florida had moved to expand Medicaid under the law, as many other states did. This is a big enough increase to wipe out the 300,000 policies "lost" -- which, as we noted, is an exaggerated number -- and it positively dwarfs the 60,000 number, which itself might be exaggerated. The impact of the Affordable Care Act on Florida can be seen clearly in newly released federal data on uninsured residents in every state. In 2013, 20 percent of Floridians lacked health coverage. In 2014, that number fell to 16.6 percent, and in 2015, it fell again to 13.3 percent. That’s a decrease in Florida’s uninsured population by one-third over two years. Americans for Prosperity responds Andres Malave, a spokesman for Americans for Prosperity, made several arguments for why the message of the ad was valid. One is that those 300,000 faced administrative headaches in continuing their insurance or finding a new plan, sometimes more than once. He also had a point that not all of the 1.7 million residents who purchased a marketplace plan were uninsured before that. However, the overall uninsured rates suggest that many people were indeed moving from uninsured to insured over the previous two years. (Malave argued that the recovering economy in the state deserves credit for the higher insurance coverage rates, rather than just the Affordable Care Act.) Our ruling Americans for Prosperity said that "300,000 Floridians have lost their health insurance" as a result of Obamacare. Even in 2013 this assertion was not entirely correct, and now, more than three years later, we know it’s not correct. Only about 60,000 people failed to re-up with Florida Blue, and there’s a good chance that many of those 60,000 found coverage elsewhere -- including through the Obamacare exchanges. Indeed, in the most recent year, the Obamacare marketplace has enabled 1.7 million Floridians to sign up for coverage, a far bigger number than the losses cited in the ad. Finally, the uninsured rate in Florida has fallen by one-third since 2013, which paints a very different picture than the ad’s zombie statistic.


The state of California ignored structural issues with the Oroville dam and paid for programs to benefit undocumented people instead.

Explanation: What's true: State and federal officials have failed to address concerns about the Oroville Dam spillways for years. What's false: The state did not sacrifice the dam to instead pay for programs benefiting undocumented immigrants.

Uncategorized, california, disasters, flooding

On 15 February 2017, the web site ConservativeDailyPost.com published an inaccurate story bearing the headline, “Post-Emergency Report Concludes: CA Governor Directed Critical Dam Funds To Programs For Illegals,” and reporting that a nonexistent post-emergency report found that California governor Jerry Brown spent $25 billion on programs for undocumented immigrants rather than investing in fixing the Oroville Dam, leading to current dangerous conditions in Northern California: Despite warnings about the flood danger posed by the Oroville Dam twelve years ago, flaky California Democratic Governor Jerry Brown ignored the warnings in favor of spending $25 billion per year on illegal immigrants. Now the chickens are coming home to roost as rainstorms later in the week could cause the neglected portion of the dam to dump large amounts of water on downtown Oroville. Brown stands revealed as spending money on unlawful immigrants rather than protecting the more than 20 million farmers and residential consumers the dam provides water to. While it is true that environmental groups have been warning state and federal authorities about structural deficiencies at Oroville Dam since well before Brown took office, the dam and programs for undocumented immigrants are funded from separate budget sources, thus spending on one does not impact the other. Ted Thomas, spokesman for the California Department of Water Resources, told us: Lake Oroville is part of the State Water Project, which is owned and operated by the California Department of Water Resources. All of the construction, operation, and maintenance costs of the State Water Project are paid by the 29 public water agencies (known as the SWP contractors) that take delivery of water from the project. ConservativeDailyPost.com linked to an article from the Washington Times, which quoted conservatives critical of the California governor for failing to address issues with the dam while spending on programs for undocumented people and a high-speed rail project. The article cites others who said President Trump should help repair the dam, instead of building a new wall at the U.S.-Mexico border: Critics of California’s willingness to spend billions of dollars on high-speed rail and services for illegal immigrants were quick to draw parallels to the state’s failure to invest in the Oroville Dam. The cost of fixing the spillway alone is now $200 million. Charlie Kirk, founder of conservative student group Turning Point USA, fired off a meme Monday saying, “California Governor Jerry Brown spends $25 billion per year to support illegal immigrants/I wonder how much Governor Brown spent to maintain the Oroville Dam?” Others defended Mr. Brown, pointing out that the emergency spillway had never been used until this year and that the catastrophic rainstorms came as a shock, especially after five years of drought. Still others turned the crisis into an opportunity to blast Mr. Trump, saying he should repair the Oroville Dam instead of building a wall on the southern border. While the article doesn’t say where Kirk’s meme sourced its “$25 billion” figure, a 2014 study by immigrant reduction proponents Federation for American Immigration Reform claimed that undocumented immigrants cost the Golden State $25.3 billion annually. The claim is questionable, however, because the group lumps U.S. citizens born to undocumented immigrants in with non-citizen children when estimating the cost of education: Nearly half of those expenditures ($12.3 billion) result from the costs of K-12 education for the children of illegal aliens — both those illegally in the country and those born in the United States. Another major outlay ($2.1 billion) results from the need to provide supplemental English language instruction to Limited English Proficient students, many of whom are children of illegal aliens. Together, these educational costs are 57.1 percent of total expenditures. Further, the study is vague about items like how researchers estimated public safety and judicial costs and what figures they used to estimate health care costs — and here again, the group lumped in children who are American citizens born to undocumented parents along with children who are undocumented. We could not locate any confirmation that undocumented people cost California taxpayers $25 billion yearly, and this report appears flawed because it includes American citizens in its estimation of that cost. What is true is that environmental experts have been warning officials since at least 2003 about the now-compromised spillway that is threatening to collapse and flood communities below. As early as 2003, Friends of the River, the Sierra Club, and the South Yuba River Citizens League have been warning state and federal officials that the spillway was unsound. In a 2003 letter, the groups wrote: We are concerned that the physical structure of the ungated spillway may not comport well with the exist well with the existing reservoir regulation manual that calls for use of reservoir surcharge space by utilizing the Dam’s ungated spillway when appropriate…  At present, the ungated spillway at Oroville Dam consists of a spillway lip only – and utilizes a hillside as the project spillway. Utilizing such a spillway has the potential to cause severe damage to the downstream hillside, project facilities, and downstream environments located in the path of the flood release… We do not believe that it is in the Department’s best interest to pursue a relicensing strategy that might in practice reduce the effective flood control space at Oroville Dam. Rather, it would seem prudent to seek approval from FERC for modifications to the Dam such as the construction of a spillway below the ungated spillway lip that would allow Dam operators to operate the Dam consistent with the existing and desired flood operation rules without causing significant damages or disruption to project land and facilities. The Washington Post explains: In October 2005, as the Oroville Dam was going through a re-licensing process, the three groups filed a motion urging a federal regulatory agency to require state officials to armor the emergency spillway with concrete so that in the event of extreme rain and flooding, water would not freely cascade down and erode the hillside. The upgrade would have cost millions of dollars and no one wanted to foot the bill, said Ronald Stork, senior policy advocate for Friends of the River, one of the groups that filed the motion. “When the dam is overfull, water goes over that weir and down the hillside, taking much of the hillside with it,” Stork told The Washington Post. “That causes huge amounts of havoc. There’s roads, there’s transmission lines, power lines that are potentially in the way of that water going down that auxiliary spillway.” Federal officials, however, determined that nothing was wrong and the emergency spillway, which can handle 350,000 cubic feet of water per second, “would perform as designed” and sediment resulting from erosion would be insignificant, according to a July 2006 memo from John Onderdonk, then a senior civil engineer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Eleven years later, flooding due to mid-February 2017 storms forced nearly 200,000 residents living in the dam’s shadow to evacuate their homes. As of 16 February 2017, crews are working to shore up the structure as more heavy rain is expected in the coming week. Stork told us: We were told not to worry our pretty little heads and they just ignored the issue of throwing the hillside into the channel below, saying that would never happen. Mother Nature just demonstrated they were incorrect.


In 2013," Dan Patrick voted "against funding to test the backlog of rape kits, allowing rapists to walk free.

Explanation: Van de Putte said Patrick voted "against funding to test the backlog of rape kits, allowing rapists to walk free." This claim is flawed in various ways -- starting with blaming Patrick for a result that didn’t come to be. In reality, Patrick appears to have been among senators to initially put the kit-test funding into the state budget. And while he voted against the final overall budget, there’s no indication he did so to stop the kits from being tested. Also, the contention that rapists walked free as a result of Patrick’s action is incorrect. The funding (to repeat) passed into law. When a statement is incorrect and ridiculous, the Truth-O-Meter warms up in a hurry. The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.

Abortion, Criminal Justice, Crime, Women, Texas, Leticia Van de Putte,

In a video ad, Democratic lieutenant governor nominee Leticia Van de Putte presents Republican nominee Dan Patrick as too extreme on vital public safety issues. The ad’s narrator initially says Patrick, a Houston senator, "would deny victims of rape any options at all," a claim rooted in Patrick’s statement in a January 2014 debate that he would permit an abortion only to save the life of an endangered mother. "And," the narrator says, "he voted against funding to test the backlog of rape kits. Allowing rapists to walk free." Patrick, the narrator says, "is just too dangerous." Did Patrick vote against testing backlogged rape kits, letting rapists walk? Van de Putte cites Patrick vote against 2014-15 state budget Manny Garcia, a spokesman for Van de Putte, a San Antonio state senator, told us by email the basis of her rape-kit claim was Patrick’s vote against the final version of the overall 2014-15 state budget that cleared the Senate in May 2013. A backup document Garcia sent over noted a June 6, 2013, Texas Tribune news story stating that the budget allotted $11 million to the Texas Department of Public Safety "to help address the state’s massive backlog of untested rape kits. "In 2011," the story said, "the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1636, by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, which requires that state law enforcement agencies report the number of untested rape kits and submit a certain number to DPS for testing." The story said the new funding would  "cover the outsourcing costs to have the kits tested, and DPS estimates that based on historical data, about half of the untested kits will yield traces of DNA." According to legislative records, Davis in May 2011 won unanimous Senate approval of her proposal when it was sent to the House and again in the body’s concurrence with House amendments--meaning Patrick voted "aye" twice as well. We asked the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault about the impact of the funding. A staff attorney, Chris Kaiser, said by email the tests are just starting to happen, but it’s "reasonable to assume that out of all those kits there will be some investigations and prosecutions resulting from DNA hits. However, we’re talking about fairly long-term effects of the 82nd Legislature’s funding, not immediate analysis that is helping to scoop offenders off the streets today." Patrick’s actions in 2013 session Next, we focused on Patrick’s actions. As noted in a previous fact check, Patrick was among four senators who voted against the final version of the 2014-15 state budget. In a May 30, 2013, public interview with the Texas Tribune’s Evan Smith, Patrick said he voted "no" -- after backing earlier versions -- because education initiatives, including funds to pay for students to take the SAT, weren’t in it. He did not mention the budgeted money to test the kits. Legislative records show Patrick supporting, and even having a hand in launching, the spending to test the kits. Patrick serves on the Senate Finance Committee, which on March 13, 2013, unanimously voted in favor of the panel’s version of Senate Bill 1, the budget act, including the money for testing the kits. To our inquiry about Patrick’s position on the rape-kit expenditure in the 2013 session, Torie Camp, an Austin consultant who was then a TAASA official, emailed us what she described as a March 13, 2013, Senate Finance Committee document indicating Patrick was among a subset of senators to initially put the kit funding into the budget. The document, including the typed notation "tentative work group decisions," indicates several committee members, including Patrick, were tasked as a "work group" with resolving the finance panel’s public safety new spending items. And, the document indicates, those senators by that date had agreed to pencil in $10.95 million in state revenue to pay for outsourcing DNA screening and testing services for approximately 10,000 sexual assault kits a year. (The document is also posted online by the Legislative Budget Board which has also posted a similar document indicating the commitment of money to the kits was an unsettled issue for senators as of Feb. 12, 2013.) On March 20, 2013, Patrick was among 28 senators who voted to advance the budget (including the kit-test funding) to the House, according to the Senate Journal entry for that day. Two senators (though not Patrick) voted "no." Generally in the 2013 session, Camp said by phone, "we never got a sense that anybody was opposed to this money in there. This wasn’t something anybody wanted to oppose." Rapists walking free? Camp said that after the budget took effect in September 2013, DPS proceeded to bid out the tests of the kits to private laboratories which, Camp said, started working through kits in fall 2014. Camp said it makes sense that some of the resulting DNA "hits," to be passed along by DPS to local police departments, will lead to individuals being convicted of assaults -- and be taken off the streets. For now," she said, "we’re just not far enough into the process to know we’re going to take sexual offenders off the streets. But my guess is we will." By email, DPS spokesman Tom Vinger said that effective June 2014, the agency had an agreement for the University of North Texas Health Science Center to test about 1,000 kits. Also, Vinger said, the department has contracted with companies in Dallas and Virginia to test the kits. "In the coming months, we will ultimately direct agencies where to send their kits," he said. "The actual testing is expected to take place over two years." Vinger said DPS doesn’t track successful prosecutions related to sexual assault testing  — whether via kits or other evidence. Vinger also said "backlog" is misleading in reference to the kits now being tested since most of them hadn’t previously been submitted to a crime lab for testing, based on decisions by local law enforcement agencies and prosecutors, he said. In August 2013, according to a New York Times/Texas Tribune news story published at the time, DPS estimated there were close to 20,000 untested kits statewide per information from various law enforcement agencies. The story said the untested kits had collected in police evidence rooms amid tight budgets, overworked crime labs and, in some cases, determinations by authorities that there was insufficient cause to test a kit. By email, we pointed out to Van de Putte that Patrick evidently played a role in initially putting the money for testing the kits into the budget and there is no indication his vote against the full final budget allowed rapists to walk. Garcia, stressing Patrick’s opposition to the final budget, emailed: "If it was up to him alone, the budget would not have passed at that point in time, Meaning that testing for the rape kits would not be funded." Our ruling Van de Putte said Patrick voted "against funding to test the backlog of rape kits, allowing rapists to walk free." This claim is flawed in various ways -- starting with blaming Patrick for a result that didn’t come to be. In reality, Patrick appears to have been among senators to initially put the kit-test funding into the state budget. And while he voted against the final overall budget, there’s no indication he did so to stop the kits from being tested. Also, the contention that rapists walked free as a result of Patrick’s action is incorrect. The funding (to repeat) passed into law. When a statement is incorrect and ridiculous, the Truth-O-Meter warms up in a hurry. ! PANTS ON FIRE – The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.


Gene therapy shown to destroy leukemia tumors

Explanation: Reuters fell a little short in comparison to WebMD in writing about a very small but promising study into a new treatment for the most prevalent form of leukemia. The story did a solid job explaining the findings, but it touched too lightly on the side effects of the treatment and the hard road ahead to find a clinical application. We give Reuters high marks, though, for finding an outside expert who could temper some of the enthusiasm found in quotes from the authors in both this story and the WebMD piece. We also like that Reuters at least raised the issue of costs. As both stories note, researchers have been trying to find a way to use genetically engineered cells to fight cancer for 20 years, making even a small study like this interesting news. Both stories sounded some cautionary notes, but Reuters could have more thoroughly shown that the study’s results were promising but not proof that a cure for leukemia is within sight.

While WebMD missed the cost component, Reuters smartly raised this issue and discussed how future research will be funded. “All of the funding for the University of Pennsylvania’s gene therapy work has come from the academic community, but the work is expensive. ‘We are looking for corporate partners as we head into Phase II trials,’ Kalos said.” As in the WebMD story, this story stated that, “Two participants in the Phase I trial have been in remission for up to a year. A third had a strong anti-tumor response, and his cancer remains in check.” The WebMD story provided more details, though. The story gave short shrift to potential harms. The WebMD story stated more plainly that patients suffered debilitating side effects and, in one case, had to be treated with steroids that may have hindered the effectiveness of the cancer therapy. The story allowed the study’s authors, who are understandably excited by the findings, to make overly effusive statements that overshadow some of the more cautionary notes in the story. For example, the story quotes Dr. Michael Kalos saying, “We put a key onto the surface of the T-cells that fits into a lock that only the cancer cells have.” The story then goes on to say that the patients “had to be treated with an immunity-boosting drug since the targeted molecule, CD-19, is also present on certain normal immune-system cells.” That doesn’t sound like a key that only fits cancer. The story could have overtly addressed this dissonace to help explain it to readers who may have been confused. The story did not engage in disease-mongering. Both stories cited just one outside source. The Reuters story, though, did a superior job here by quoting someone who had some words of caution. Dr. Walter Urba of the Providence Cancer Center in Portland warned that “the long-term viability of the treatment is still unknown.” We were surprised to see no mention of radiation, chemotherapy or bone marrow transplants in this story. At a minimum, the WebMD story discussed bone marrow transplants. The story does note the study is a Phase 1 trial iin the 4th sentence and also notes that researchers intend to enroll four more subjects. WebMD did a better job showing that, even for people hoping to enroll in a trial for this therapy, the odds will be long. We wish stories would take for granted that readers know what Phase I and Phase II means. Satisfactory job establishing the novelty – even in the first line of the story. Neither story relied on this University of Pennsylvania news release.


Explanation: The focus of this story was a review of a newly-published study demonstrating added benefit of ultrasound in addition to mammography for women at increased risk of cancer due to dense breast tissue. The story appropriately mentions why traditional screening methods may miss an early-stage tumor in this population. It is not the usual standard to do any other screening (aside from mammogram) in women with dense breast tissue situations, except for very high-risk BRCA carriers who now get MRI as well. Ultrasound is already available, as implied in the story, and not a new method of treatment. The broadcast does not mention that physicians and ultrasonographers in the study were trained using standardized screening protocols. In a real-world clinical setting, the availability of properly training physicians and technicians can vary, resulting in greater false-negatives or false-positives. The editorial by Dr. Kulk accompanying the JAMA source article states, "It is questionable whether the diagnostic accuracy achieved in the study..would have been the same if nonradiologists had performed screening ultrasound." The story could have mentioned this. In addition, the story didn’t discuss costs, didn’t explain why this study was "the most definitive so far," and didn’t explain benefits in absolute terms which are probably most helpful to most viewers. Importantly, the story mentions that screening may need to be tailored to a woman’s individual risk profile, as well as her preferred screening schedule based on an assessment of risks and benefits.

The broadcast mentioned that a breast ultrasound is less expensive than MRI, but it does not list the cost. Medicare reimbursement for breast ultrasound is $85, "which does not fully cover the costs of perfoming and interpreting the examination." [ref Berg]. This highlights the common cost problem of insurance payments not being sufficient to cover costs. The same situation applies for mammography – hospitals lose money on every mammogram they do. The source article contains information on issues related to increased resources anticipated with additional screening. Discussion could have easily been included. The story does quantify some of the benefits of treatment, namely, 49% of cancers were detected by mammogram alone, and 78% of cancers were detected by mammography plus ultrasound. The broadcast does not list important absolute data included in the study, namely, that the addition of ultrasound found about 4 additional cancers per 1000 women (7.6 per 1000 with mammography v. 11.8 per 1000 with ultrasound and mammography). We believe that absolute benefit data are far more helpful for viewers and should have been included. The story mentioned the potential harms of treatment, which may be an increase in false-positives, unnecessary biopsy, and anxiety. False positives may decrease with additional screening, such as an MRI, or when ultrasound is done annually. The high rate of false positives with mammography plus ultrasound meant that only about 1 in 10 women with cancer suspected on combined screening turned out to have cancer when biopsy was done, whereas about 1 in 5 women with abnormal mammograms alone actually had cancer. The story does not adequately discuss the study design, which is important, as it is one of the few large-scale randomized controlled trials evaluating ultrasound as an additional screening method for women with dense breasts. The story simply says this study was "the most definitive so far." Why? Who says? Women with breast cancer are very well-informed and understandably curious for context and in-depth analysis. This story could have done more on this count. The story does not engage in disase mongering. The focus of the broadcast a review of a peer-reviewed JAMA paper showing ultrasound in addition to  mammography may find more early-stage cancers in women with dense breast tissue. The story appropriately mentions the population at higher-risk, and why traditional screening methods may miss early-stage cancer in these women. The only physician or expert interviewed in the story was someone who only commented on how ultrasound works – not on the findings of the study. So the merits of the study were taken at face value without any independent expert perspective. The story mentioned MRI as a supplemental screening method for women at very high risk of breast cancer or recurrence due to a variety of risk factors, including dense breast tissue. The story also mentions breast biospy if there is a suspicion of cancer. Importantly, the story mentioned that screening may need to be tailored to a woman’s individual risk profile, as well as her prefered screening schedule based on risks and benefits. Ultrasound machines are typically available in most medical centers. The broadcast does not mention that physicians and ultrasonographers in the study cited were trained using standardized screening protocols. In a real-world clinical setting, the availability of properly trained physicians and technicians can vary, resulting in greater false-negative or false-positive test results. The editorial accompanying the source article states, "It is questionable whether the diagnostic accuracy achieved in the study..would have been the same if nonradiologists had performed screening ultrasound." It is not the usual standard to do any other screening (aside from mammogram) in women with dense breast tissue situations, except for super high-risk BRCA carriers who now get MRI as well. Ultrasound is already available, as implied in the story, and not a new method of treatment. The study provides good evidence of the value of ultrasound as an additional screening tool. The story has some independent reporting and information does not appear to be taken from a press release.


Heart scans tied to “evidence-free” treatment: study

Explanation: This story summarized the study and its significance clearly in the first sentence – “When symptom-free people have heart scans to look for clogged arteries, they can end up with overtreatment and side effects.”  The story delivered powerful quotes from experts to put the findings into context for readers:  “Testing might lead to more harm than good.”   “With these new imaging techniques, we are left with the dilemma of what to do with the results.”   “Overdiagnosis is threatening to become an increasingly important public health problem because of the enthusiasm for and proliferation of uNPRoven screening tests.”

heart disease,Imaging studies,Reuters Health

Costs were reported. Much more clearly than the competing WSJ story, Reuters reported: “”Testing might lead to more harm than good.” Unlike the competing Wall Street Journal story, this story was clear about the potential harms: “it’s well known that the scans expose patients to a high dose of X-rays, which can increase their likelihood of developing cancer. And the dyes used to enhance the images cause kidney damage in a significant portion of people.” Clear, succinct summary of the evidence. No disease mongering. An author of the paper, and the author of an accompanying editorial were quoted. The story ends with the researcher saying “doctors should focus on patients’ lifestyle and traditional risk factors such as smoking and obesity.” The story was clear that the scans are not currently recommended by guidelines but that “there have been several reports of doctors doing CCTA heart scans in healthy patients, although the practice is currently discouraged by the American Heart Association.” The relative novelty of the screening test could be deduced from the story. It’s clear that the story did not rely on a news release.


Of the top five cities for staged automobile accidents, three are in Florida. … We rank No. 1 in the country in staged auto accidents.

Explanation: Florida is tops for staged auto accidents, Jeff Atwater says

Consumer Safety, Crime, Florida, Jeff Atwater,

At the AP Legislative Planning Session on Jan. 19, 2011, Florida’s chief financial officer lobbed a claim about auto insurance shenanigans. "Of the top five cities for staged automobile accidents, three are in Florida. … We rank No. 1 in the country in staged auto accidents," Jeff Atwater said. We have long known that Florida is special, the reluctant recipient of certain superlatives. These two claims seemed almost too good to be true, but were they? We decided to delve in. Atwater made the remarks less than a week after the topic of fabricating car crashes for cash grabbed several headlines, including a front-page story in the Jan. 16 edition of the Miami Herald. A story earlier in the week chronicled the arrest of five people in Miami-Dade and a sixth in Naples. They were charged with faking car accidents after police say they hired people to stage wrecks or file false claims with insurance companies using drivers’ personal injury protection insurance policies. All told, the scammers billed insurance companies up to $170,000 for medical treatment that was never performed, according to the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud. The issue of fraud related to personal injury protection, or PIP, insurance has been of interest to Atwater. His office issued a press release reporting that PIP-related fraud costs the average Florida family as much as $400 a year. Four Florida cities are among the top 10 in PIP fraud – Hialeah, Tampa, Orlando and, yes, Miami. The Herald reported that more than 400 people were charged in the past two years with PIP fraud. And so, Atwater vowed to keep a spotlight on PIP fraud. "The thieves committing these scams need to know that it’s my plan to put them behind bars," said Atwater, a Republican from North Palm Beach. It was only a few days later that Atwater talked about the fraud cases in Florida at the AP meeting. According to spokeswoman Alexis Lambert, his statements were based on a May 10, 2010, report from the National Insurance Crime Bureau, an Illinois not-for-profit that teams up with various insurers and law enforcement agencies in an effort to prosecute insurance criminals. The study showed that reports of "staged accident questionable claims" spiked 46 percent from 2007 through 2009. The top five states that generated the most "staged accident QCs," or questionable claims, were: (1) Florida, 3,006; (2) New York, 1,680; (3) California, 1,619; (4) Texas, 792; and (5) Illinois, 433. The five cities that saw the "most staged accident QCs" were: (1) New York, 1,304; (2) Tampa, 562; (3) Miami, 511 (4) Orlando, 422; and (5) Houston, 376. These revelations don’t come as a surprise to observers. "I think it’s a generality that Florida ranks well up there," said James Quiggle, a spokesman for the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, a Washington, D.C., anti-fraud watchdog. "I don’t think anyone who sees the national picture will dispute that." According to a 2007-2008 report from the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, Florida led the nation in 2005 in the recovery of insurance fraud-related losses through court-ordered restitution. These court findings suggest Florida has ranked high across the board. Despite his intention to put a spotlight on auto insurance fraud, Atwater fails to note that the numbers are for "questionable claims." These, according to National Insurance Crime Bureau spokesman Frank Scafidi, are not the same as actual staged accidents. An analogy might be the difference between a charge and a conviction. The terms may often be used interchangeably, but law enforcement personnel and attorneys certainly know the difference. "We stress to people to keep in mind that these are initial referrals and not definitive acts of fraud, although most of these will certainly be fraud," Scafidi wrote in an e-mail message. Scafidi elaborated. In 2009, NICB reports that there were 85,201 questionable claims submitted and just 4,802 of that number were related to staged accidents. In an average year, he notes, more than 48 million claims are filed by the Insurance Services Office, a company that maintains claims data. That said, only 0.17 percent of the claims were deemed suspicious or questionable, and only about one in 20 of those involved questions of staged accidents. The sample is not enough to draw conclusions on, Scafidi added, but, "It is a useful tool for analysis and for us to see where the potential fraud hot spots are." Atwater is mostly correct about the high numbers of auto fraud cases coming from Florida, but he neglects to mention that the numbers he referred to are "questionable claims," not yet confirmed as actual staged accidents. It’s an important detail. For omitting that clarification.


Rhode Island, Drugs, Recreation, Science, Marijuana, Heidi Heilman,

Editors note: This item was revised on April 1, 2014 to reflect the fact that increases of 300 and 800 percent represent four- and nine-fold increases respectively. The ruling remains the same. In the debate over whether marijuana should be legalized, one issue is the question of potency. Critics of legalization argue that the street drug now available for sale is not the marijuana that a lot of baby boomers and Generation Xers have used. One of them, Heidi Heilman, director of New England field development for Smart Approaches to Marijuana and president of the Massachusetts Prevention Alliance, raised the issue March 13 in a commentary in The Providence Journal. "Today’s marijuana is 300 percent to 800 percent more potent than the pot of yesteryear," she wrote. "Such dangerous levels of THC heighten mental illness and addiction risks for those who smoke marijuana — especially for kids with developing brains." THC or tetrahydrocannabinol, available by prescription, is the key active ingredient in marijuana. It's well established that the potency of marijuana has increased over time. On Jan. 24, PolitiFact national ruled that when former Rhode Island Congressman Patrick Kennedy said that marijuana today is "genetically modified," with THC levels that "far surpass the marijuana" of the 1970s. Heilman was being more specific. Because something 100 percent more potent is actually twice as potent, she was saying that the potency of today's marijuana is now four to nine times greater than "yesteryear," a rather vague starting point. Nonetheless, we wanted to see if her statement was on target or her statistic was a bit high. Heilman was quick to send us several pieces of information. The first was a graph showing a rapid increase in potency from 1960 to 2011, a 52-year span. It shows the ratio of THC in marijuana going from 0.2 percent to 11.4 percent. That's an increase of 5,700 percent, well outside the range cited by Heilman. But are those numbers reliable? The graph says the information came from a study in the Journal of Forensic Science. But that study was published in 2010, and only covered a 16-year period that ends in 2008. Its authors, researchers at the National Center for Natural Products Research at the University of Mississippi, examined 46,000 samples of marijuana seized during law enforcement raids. They found that the THC concentrations of marijuana had risen by about 171 percent in that time period, well below the 300 to 800 percent increase cited by Heilman. We also contacted the Drug Enforcement Administration in Boston and Washington and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. They referred us back to the research center at Ole Miss, which has been monitoring THC content at least since the early 1970s. The researchers there sent us copies of their reports, all published in the journal, along with test results that included the most recent data. We also secured some of their quarterly reports. We found that even though the report Heilman cited didn’t back up her claim, the Ole Miss data did. YEAR Tested % THC YEAR Tested % THC YEAR Tested % THC 1972 34 0.18 1986 1370 2.36 2000 3148 4.92 1973 33 0.22 1987 1550 2.96 2001 2716 5.36 1974 114 0.36 1988 1640 3.18 2002 2413 6.4 1975 149 0.48 1989 1075 3.04 2003 2517 6.31 1976 209 0.98 1990 1108 3.24 2004 2637 7.24 1977 251 1.76 1991 2148 3.09 2005 3004 7.24 1978 130 1.73 1992 3336 3.08 2006 2891 7.76 1979 220 1.53 1993 3031 3.38 2007 3114 8.74 1980 151 2.15 1994 3024 3.50 2008 2775 8.89 1981 249 2.11 1995 4792 3.77 2009 3079 8.34 1982 435 3.07 1996 2451 4.09 2010 2720 10.7 1983 1145 3.30 1997 2496 4.64 2011 2342 11.13 1984 1030 3.31 1998 2283 4.47 2012 2055 12.3 1985 1449 2.83 1999 2692 4.6     In 2012, the most recent year in which testing has been completed, the average THC concentration was 12.3 percent. That would be 300 percent higher (or four times stronger) than 1992 levels, when the average was 3.08 percent. And it would be 800 percent higher (or nine times stronger) than the average level of 0.98 percent found in 1976. How high could the THC content potentially go? One specimen, seized on Sept. 11, 2007, was found to have a THC content of 37.2 percent. Our ruling Heidi Heilman said, "Today’s marijuana is 300 percent to 800 percent more potent than the pot of yesteryear." Long-term testing shows that, on average, today's marijuana is three times more potent than pre-1993 marijuana and eight times more potent than grass seized in 1976 and earlier. (If you have a claim you’d like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, email us at [email protected] And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.)


On Senate confirmation of judicial nominees, “the Democrats are holding them up beyond anything -- beyond comprehension, they're holding them up.”

Explanation: A report issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service indicates that while the average time for confirmation is historically high, federal judges appointed by President Trump were confirmed faster than in President Obama’s first year.

federal courts, judicial nominations, Senate confirmations,

President Donald Trump has repeatedly boasted about his success in getting federal judges confirmed, while at the same time complaining that Senate Democrats are slow-walking his judicial nominees.But a report issued this month by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service indicates that while the average time for confirmation is historically high, Trump’s appointees were confirmed faster than in President Barack Obama’s first year.Trump has also boasted about the “gift” of so many judicial vacancies left for him by Obama, suggesting that “maybe [Obama] got complacent” toward the end of his presidency. In reality, the reason Trump was left so many vacancies is that Republicans virtually stopped confirming federal judges appointed by Obama during his final two years as president.In speeches, interviews and tweets, Trump regularly boasts about the number of confirmed federal judges as a sign of his success. Just as often, Trump criticizes Senate Democrats — and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, in particular — for “obstructing” or “slow-walking” his judicial appointments.Here are a few examples:This week, Schumer fired back.“Well, you know, they can’t have it both ways,” Schumer said during a press conference on May 15. “They can’t brag that they put in more judges than anybody else and then, at the same time, say they’re not getting — they’re being obstructed. So they ought to figure out where they’re at.”On May 2, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service released a report, “U.S. Circuit and District Court Nominations During President Trump’s First Year in Office: Comparative Analysis with Recent Presidents,” that provides some historical context.CRS Finding: Trump had the most circuit court confirmations of any first-year president since at least Harry Truman. The report found that in his first year, Trump nominated 19 people to the U.S. circuit court of appeals, 12 of whom were confirmed during his first year; and he nominated 49 people to U.S. district court judgeships, six of whom were confirmed in Trump’s first year.The 12 circuit court confirmations is the most for any first year president dating to at least 1945, CRS said.A Los Angeles Times analysis concluded, “One year into his presidency, Donald Trump is among the most successful presidents when it comes to appointing federal judges.” The analysis found Trump ranked sixth out of 19 top ranking presidents for the highest number of federal circuit and district court judges appointed in their first year.CRS Finding: Trump’s judicial nominees were confirmed more quickly than Obama’s. According to CRS, in Trump’s first year it took an average of 115 days and a median of 109 days between nomination and confirmation. (Median is the midpoint, meaning half took more than 109 days and half were less. )That’s a relatively long wait time by historical standards, but it’s less time — by average and median — than for those appointed by Obama in his first year. (Both Trump and Obama enjoyed a Senate majority from their own party in their first year. )“Of the four Presidents included in the table, President Trump’s first-year nominees had the second longest average and median number of days from nomination to confirmation (President Obama’s nominees had the longest average and median — 137 and 130 days, respectively),” the CRS report said.The CRS report also notes that, “The average and median number of days from nomination to confirmation for President Trump’s first-year nominees represent a departure from the upward trend in the length of time first-year nominees waited to be confirmed during the previous three presidencies. Specifically, it is the first instance over the past several presidencies in which the average and median wait times from nomination to confirmation of a President’s first-year nominees were both shorter than the average and median wait times of his immediate predecessor’s first-year nominees.”CRS Finding: Half of Trump’s circuit court nominees were approved in less than 100 days – the highest percentage of any president since Bill Clinton. It also marks the first time since 1993 that at least half of a president’s first-year circuit court nominees were confirmed in less than 100 days, CRS noted. Six of Trump’s 12 circuit court nominees were approved in less than 100 days, but none of Obama’s three and only two of Bush’s six were approved that quickly, the report found.The wait times for district court nominees have been decidedly longer for Trump. Two district court nominees, Dabney L. Friedrich and Scott L. Palk, waited 173 and 171 days, respectively, the longest wait times since 2001 in a president’s first year.Russell Wheeler, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program and president of the Governance Institute, provided us more up-to-date data on Trump’s federal court nominees.As of May 16, Trump had 21 circuit judges confirmed, including two earlier this week, Wheeler said. The median from nomination to confirmation of the circuit court judges was 131 days. Trump has had 17 district court judges confirmed with a median confirmation length of 180 days.At the same point in his presidency, Obama had 16 district confirmations with a median length of 125 days. The median for his nine circuit confirmations was 218 days, Wheeler said.“The important point is that median days to confirmation have been increasing steadily [for presidents leading up to Trump],” Wheeler said. “So far, Trump confirmations have been quicker.”CRS Finding: A higher percentage of Trump’s district court nominees were less qualified than Obama’s, while the percentage of qualified circuit court judges was about the same.CRS made several other observations about Trump’s federal court nominees compared to his immediate predecessors.Among Trump’s 19 nominees for circuit court judge, 84 percent received a rating of well-qualified by the American Bar Association. That’s about the same percentage as Obama’s (83 percent). However, among Trump’s 49 district court nominees, just 53 percent were rated well-qualified (compared to 86 percent from Obama).CRS Finding: Trump’s judicial nominees face more procedural opposition. CRS also found more general opposition to Trump’s nominees by Democrats.“Floor consideration of U.S. circuit and district court nominations during the first year of the Trump presidency frequently involved the use of the cloture process to reach Senate confirmation,” CRS wrote.A cloture motion is used to limit debate and requires three-fifths, or 60 votes, to pass. In Trump’s first year, CRS said “cloture was used for each of the 12 circuit court nominations that received a final up-or-down vote and for 5 of the 6 district court nominations that received a final vote. In contrast, during the first years of the other three presidencies included in this report’s analysis, the cloture process was used once to reach an up-or-down vote on a circuit or district court nomination.”Even so, as we said, Trump’s nominees took less time to be confirmed than Obama’s.“Additionally,” CRS wrote, “the confirmation of nominees always occurred by roll call vote (rather than by unanimous consent or voice vote) and, for most circuit court nominations, was marked by a relatively high number of ‘nay’ votes among Senators not belonging to the President’s party.”We should also note that Trump usually couches his complaint about Democrats obstructing judicial nominees with a more general complain about Democrats slow-walking all of his government appointees.A joint project of the Partnership for Public Service and the Washington Post tracks roughly 600 “key executive branch nominations through the confirmation process.” According to the project’s data, as of May 17, the Senate had confirmed 426 of his appointments, with another 195 pending. The average time to confirm was 85 days — 18 days longer than Obama’s and longer than for former Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.But, as we wrote in “Who’s to Blame for Slow Confirmations?” in October, Trump and the Democrats both share some blame for the longer confirmation process under Trump.Trump also revises history when he talks about the number of vacancies on the federal court he inherited from the Obama administration.Here’s how Trump put it during a fundraiser in Missouri on March 14.Trump, March 14: So I come and there’s this whole pile of papers on my desk – these are federal judges, these are applications. I said, “How many do we appoint?” “145.” “145!” Because for two years, two and a half years, almost none were appointed by President Obama. So I say thank you, President Obama.Two weeks later, Trump expounded on the same topic during a speech in Ohio.Trump, March 30: You know, when I got in, we had over 100 federal judges that weren’t appointed. Now, I don’t know why Obama left that. It was like a big, beautiful present to all of us. Why the hell did he leave that? Maybe he got complacent.But now we have about 145 federal district judges. We have 17 court of appeals judges. And as I said, we have the one Supreme Court justice. But think of 145 district judges. That’s world-changing, country-changing, USA-changing. And we’re going all out. We have unbelievably talented, smart, great people being put in those slots.But we were left a present. I never said this before. It was like the gift from Heaven. We were left judges. They’re the ones that judge on your disputes. They judge on what’s fair on the environment and what’s not fair; where they’re going to take your farms and factories away, and where they’re not. Amazing. It was the gift. Thank you very much, President Obama. We all appreciate it. Thank you. What happened? How did he do that? How did he do that?When Trump took office, in January 2017, there were 112 federal judicial vacancies. By the end of the year, that number had grown to 144. And was at 146 as of May 18.That’s a high number, and according to the Federal Bar Association it is “straining the capacity of the federal courts to administer justice in an adequate and timely manner.”But is Obama to blame for the high number of vacancies? No, it was not the result of complacency by Obama, as Trump suggested, but rather resistance to Obama’s judicial nominations from Senate Republicans who took over a majority during the last two years of Obama’s presidency.“On the matter of obstruction, consider why Trump has so many vacancies to fill: because Republicans, when they took control of the Senate in 2015, practically stopped confirming judges,” Wheeler, from Brookings told us. “They confirmed 18 in those two years. In the final two years of Reagan’s eight years, with Democrats in the Senate majority, 83 confirmations. With Clinton, in final two years, with Republicans in the majority, 73. In Bush’s final two of eight years, with Democrats in the majority, 68.”We should also note that Republicans blocked Obama’s attempt to fill a Supreme Court opening. Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in March of 2016, but the Senate Republicans refused to consider his nomination.In early January 2017, just before Trump took office, there were 59 federal court nominees pending. That’s why Trump inherited so many vacancies.


Pedestrian finds baby alive in bag along Indiana roadway.

Explanation: Southern Indiana police say an infant found abandoned inside a bag left near a roadway is alive and healthy.

Seymour police say a person walking their dog found the child Tuesday afternoon along a fence row about 20 yards (18 meters) from a road on Seymour’s southeast side. Officers called to the scene found that the baby was alive and doctors at Seymour’s Schneck Medical Center determined that the infant was healthy. Detective Sgt. C.J. Foster says in a statement that no arrests have been made and police are investigating. Foster says the city that’s located about 60 miles (96 kilometers) south of Indianapolis has a baby box at one of its fire stations where people can relinquish newborns anonymously, without fear of prosecution.


Flashing night-lights may help lessen jet lag, circadian problems

Explanation: This study of flashing light therapy enrolled 39 people, and exposed 31 of them to a series of two-millisecond light flashes with changing intervals while sleeping. The other eight were exposed to 60 minutes of continuous bright light. Those who experienced the flashing light were more quickly able to alter their circadian clock and thus, in theory, more quickly adapt to a new time zone. The report covered the main bases found in the published research and, unlike a CNN article on the same study, included the helpful commentary of an outside observer who was able to add context to the meaning and impact of the study. Jet lag is a significant concern for many people who have to travel distances that span multiple time zones, where their ability to work effectively is compromised as the body struggles to adjust to a new time zone. This means a simple, but effective light therapy session could bring much-needed relief to those who have to travel but also, possibly, to those who do shift work and are frequently forced into combat against the body’s natural circadian rhythms. People who work in important jobs where alertness and quick adaptability to changing sleep schedules are required (airline pilots, doctors, nurses, ambulance attendants, truck drivers, etc) may benefit from such a therapy.

While no costs were discussed, the suggestion that the device might be expensive was made: “The night flashes require special technology and equipment, beyond just a smartphone, which are still in development, Zeitzer said.” We’ll consider this nod in the direction of cost sufficient for a Satisfactory rating, since it would be difficult to say exactly how much such a device would cost at this stage. Benefits of those who experience the flashing light therapy over those who have the continuous light therapy were described this way: “A series of flashes similar to a camera flash delivered every 10 seconds over a 60-minute period delayed sleepiness by two hours, compared to a 36-minute delay for those exposed to continuous light for an hour.” These quotes were also helpful in quantifying and understanding the benefits: “In essence, using the night before you traveled from California to N.Y. would move your circadian system two-thirds of the way there before you even left,” Zeitzer said. Arriving in New York, you would be synced to the local time after one day, he said. The report indicated there was no harm involved:  “In a previous study, the short flashes of light at night did not interrupt sleep or reduce its quality.” This report also indicated helpful additional information from an outside observer, Anna Wirz-Justice, professor emeritus at the Center for Chronobiology at the University of Basel in Switzerland, who was not part of the new study, who said: “Mistiming light therapy can make jet lag worse.” This report rates satisfactory on the quality of evidence by including cautionary advice from an outside observer saying that independent verification needs to happen: It is “far too early – neither the methodology is available [to] outside research, nor any guidance about safety, nor tests of simulated jet lag in an appropriate ‘realistic’ protocol,”  according to Anna Wirz-Justice. The report included this helpful phrase to indicate that this isn’t a ‘real’ disease: “’Jet lag itself is really a nuisance syndrome as it is self-resolving,’ said senior author Jamie Zeitzer, assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Stanford University School of Medicine in California.” This article scores well on consulting an independent source by quoting a researcher who was not part of the study, Anna Wirz-Justice, professor emeritus at the Center for Chronobiology at the University of Basel in Switzerland. The study could have made reference to other systematic reviews of therapies used to treat jet lag, such as Cochrane Reviews on caffeine or melatonin. This article made it fairly clear that this technology wasn’t ready for consumers by mentioning that further research needed to happen and that frequent flyers shouldn’t try this on their own. The article is clear that the study is based on substantial theory about the effects of light on circadian rhythms and mentions previous research that the team had carried out, so there is no misleading representation as to the technique’s novelty. Given the helpful comments from an outside (not involved in the study) researcher, we would say the report did not substantially rely on a news release.


Burundi kicks out top WHO official in country ahead of vote.

Explanation: Burundi is kicking out the World Health Organization’s top official in the country just days before the presidential election and after the WHO raised concerns about crowded political rallies.

Matshidiso Moeti, Kigali, Health, General News, Elections, East Africa, Africa, International News, Rwanda, United Nations, Burundi, Virus Outbreak, Presidential elections

A foreign ministry letter seen by The Associated Press says the WHO representative to Burundi, Walter Kazadi Mulombo, has been declared persona non grata and must leave the East African nation by Friday. The letter says three WHO experts also must go. The letter gives no explanation for the expulsions. Reached by phone and asked for details, Foreign Minister Ezechiel Nibigira hung up Thursday morning. The WHO representative, Mulombo, did not immediately respond to phone calls. The WHO Africa regional chief, Matshidiso Moeti, described Mulombo as an “extremely competent person” and said the WHO was communicating with Burundi “to clarify and understand the reasoning for the decision they have taken.” The day that election campaigning in Burundi began late last month, images circulated online of crowded political rallies with President Pierre Nkurunziza in attendance. Moeti messaged the head of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about it, the Africa CDC chief has said. The Africa CDC chief, John Nkengasong, on Thursday called Burundi’s action “unfortunate” and said any differences should be addressed by dialogue instead of actions that affect the pandemic response, “We don’t have the luxury of kicking out the WHO,” he told reporters. “This war has to be won in a coordinated fashion, and coordination is key. We’re in dire need of expertise. ... We encourage countries to do the right thing .” Burundi has 27 confirmed cases of the coronavirus, but some citizens and others have raised concerns that more exist. Authorities have been accused of downplaying the virus and relying on divine protection, while rights groups have alleged squalid conditions and lack of access to quarantine facilities. Burundi is using virus restrictions to limit election observers, however, telling the East African regional bloc that any arriving foreigners would face a 14-day quarantine. The election is May 20. Holding a vote that allows the virus to spread could make it “extremely difficult” for a country to contain it later, the Africa CDC chief said. “If an election is conducted that limits space for people to come together, it’s OK. But if you cannot ensure that ... then it’s gonna put you in danger.”  Burundi’s previous election in 2015 sparked deadly political turmoil as Nkurunziza successfully ran for a third term that some said he had no right to pursue. This time he’s not running, but critics have accused the ruling party of targeting the leading opposition party and its supporters ahead of the vote. Some fear further unrest if this election’s results are disputed over allegations of rigging. This is not the first time Burundi’s government has expelled a United Nations official. It kicked out the U.N. human rights office a year ago after the U.N. repeatedly raised concerns about killings and other alleged abuses following the 2015 vote. Burundi also became the first country to leave the International Criminal Court after ICC judges authorized an investigation into allegations of state-sponsored crimes including murder, rape and torture. ___ Cara Anna in Johannesburg contributed.


Cavs’ Love discloses bouts with panic attacks, mental health.

Explanation: Suffering for years in silence, Kevin Love has opened up about his struggles with mental health.

NBA basketball, Anxiety, Mental health, Health, Basketball, North America, Sports, Kevin Love, Cleveland

The Cavaliers forward writes in an essay for the Players’ Tribune that he had a panic attack during a game this season and he has spent most of his life afraid to accept there was something wrong with him. “For 29 years, I thought about mental health as someone else’s problem,” he said. Love says he was stricken with anxiety Nov. 5 during a home game against the Atlanta Hawks. Love adds that he had been under family stress and hadn’t been sleeping well. After briefly being winded while playing 15 minutes in the first half, he felt his heart racing and couldn’t catch his breath during a timeout in the third quarter. “It’s hard to describe, but everything was spinning, like my brain was trying to climb out of my head,” said Love, a five-time All-Star now sidelined after breaking his left hand last month. “The air felt thick and heavy. My mouth was like chalk. I remember our assistant coach yelling something about a defensive set. I nodded, but I didn’t hear much of what he said. By that point, I was freaking out.” Love was taken to the Cleveland Clinic, but tests didn’t reveal anything abnormal. He returned to playing at a high level, but was puzzled by what happened and burdened about people finding out. Although he did not mention it in his essay, titled “Everyone Is Going Through Something,” Love left a Jan. 20 game against Oklahoma City under similar circumstances. He also missed the team’s practice the following day. Those absences prompted the now infamous heated team meeting in which former teammate Isaiah Thomas and others questioned why Love had been excused. The exchange led to tense days around the Cavs, who rebuilt their roster by trading Thomas and four other players before the deadline. Love’s father, Stan, also played in the NBA. Kevin Love says he always struggled with the stigma attached to an athlete who shows weakness. “Growing up, you figure out really quickly how a boy is supposed to act,” he said. “You learn what it takes to ‘be a man.’ It’s like a playbook: Be strong. Don’t talk about your feelings. Get through it on your own. So for 29 years of my life, I followed that playbook.” The Cavs encouraged Love to see a therapist and he gets counseling a few times a month when the team is at home. Love said he drew courage to go public with his issues after Toronto All-Star DeMar DeRozan’s recently acknowledged he has had bouts of depression. After playing against DeRozan for years, Love said he would have never guessed one of the game’s best players was having problems similar to his own. “The reality is that we probably have a lot in common with what our friends and colleagues and neighbors are dealing with,” Love wrote. “So I’m not saying everyone should share all their deepest secrets — not everything should be public and it’s every person’s choice. But creating a better environment for talking about mental health . that’s where we need to get to.” Love’s revelations promoted praise from teammate LeBron James, who posted on Twitter: “You’re even more powerful now than ever before @kevinlove!!! Salute and respect brother!” Love ended his piece by encouraging anyone dealing with inner struggle to seek help. “So if you’re reading this and you’re having a hard time, no matter how big or small it seems to you, I want to remind you that you’re not weird or different for sharing what you’re going through,” he said. “Just the opposite. It could be the most important thing you do. It was for me.”


Tests show King Tut died from malaria, study says.

Explanation: King Tutankhamen, the teen-aged pharaoh whose Egyptian tomb yielded dazzling treasures, limped around on tender bones and a club foot and probably died from malaria, researchers said on Tuesday.

A detail view of the Coffinette for the Viscera of Tutankhamun is shown on display at the "Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of Pharaohs" exhibition at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art during a media preview in Los Angeles June 15, 2005. REUTERS/Fred Prouser There has been speculation about the fate of the boy king, who died sometime around 1324 BC probably at age 19, since the 1922 discovery of his intact tomb in Egypt’s Valley of Kings. Tests performed on 16 royal mummies found four, including Tut, had contracted a severe form of malaria that likely cut short Tut’s reign — ruling out murder or some other sickness. Scientists from Egypt, Germany and elsewhere, including Zahi Hawass of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, compiled results from genetic and radiological testing performed on the mummies between 2007 and 2009. The results clarify details about the 155-year-long 18th Dynasty that included Tutankhamen, who inherited the throne at age 11. The scientists speculated Tut was weakened by a broken leg possibly from a fall. That and a malaria infection led to his death, they believe. Tut was afflicted with a cleft palate, mild clubfoot in his left foot and other bone ailments. He and some family members had a form of Kohler disease, which can cause foot bones to collapse from lack of blood but would not have been fatal. “Tutankhamen had multiple disorders, and some of them might have reached the cumulative character of an inflammatory, immune-suppressive — and thus weakening — syndrome. He might be envisioned as a young but frail king who needed canes to walk,” Hawass wrote in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Besides the priceless gold artifacts found in Tut’s tomb, he was also equipped for the afterlife with some 130 canes and staves — some with signs of wear — and a veritable pharmacy. The scientists were also fairly certain they identified the mummies belonging to Tut’s father, Akhenaten, and his grandmother, Tiye, based on shared blood groups. They shot down speculation that Tut and his forebears had severe abnormalities, ruling out Marfan syndrome and another condition that could have led to enlarged breasts. “It is unlikely that either Tutankhamen or Akhenaten actually displayed a significantly bizarre or feminine physique. It is important to note that ancient Egyptian kings typically had themselves and their families represented in an idealized fashion,” Hawass wrote.


NH to apply for Medicaid waiver on mental health treatment.

Explanation: New Hampshire health officials say they’re planning to apply for a waiver from the federal government that would loosen restrictions on how Medicaid dollars could be spent on mental health treatment in the state.

Health, New Hampshire, General News, Medicaid, Mental health

New Hampshire Public Radio  reports a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services says staff are working on an application for a waiver. The spokesperson said there will be opportunities for public comment before the application is completed. Federal law currently prohibits the use of Medicaid dollars to pay for mental health care at facilities with more than 16 beds, to prevent the so-called “warehousing” of mental health patients with public funds. Earlier this month the Trump administration announced it would allow states to apply for exemptions to that requirement, as long as they meet certain other criteria.


Colorado pot campaigner seeks 'sanctuary' status for mountain town.

Explanation: Surrounded by tie-dyed T-shirts and marijuana pipes at her gift shop in the Colorado mountain town of Nederland, veteran pot activist Kathleen Chippi seems an unlikely candidate to have voted no when the state legalized recreational weed in 2012.

She says the measure was “fake” legalization because marijuana remains prohibited by federal law, and users, including medicinal pot patients and their caregiver, still risk having their lives ruined by prosecution and jail time. But in what appears to be a largely symbolic move of her own, Chippi is now leading an effort to have Nederland, population about 1,500, declared the world’s first “sanctuary” for therapeutic and spiritual consumers of the drug. Based on the “sanctuary city” laws that dozens of U.S. cities used to shield Central and Southern American refugees from deportation in the 1980s, the proposal is likely to go to residents for a vote in the fall. “Just like with immigration policy, we need a place where people can be protected,” said Chippi, speaking in her shop near the foot of the snow-capped Indian Peaks Wilderness. Protecting the spiritual use of cannabis is crucial for the 46-year-old, who bears more than a passing resemblance to Janis Joplin. Several years ago she founded the Closer to the Heart Cannabis Ministry, which she says has more than 300 members who believe marijuana is the Biblical Tree of Life, and that its use is a sacrament. She opened Nederland’s first medical pot dispensary in 2009, and eventually had more than 2,400 patients, she said. But Chippi shut its doors the following year, angered by regulations passed by Colorado lawmakers that she viewed as a “violation of the constitutional rights of sick people.” She has since sued the state six times seeking changes in the rules and greater clarity for users and caregiver. At the same time, she began planning a “sanctuary” ordinance. The proposal, drafted by Denver attorney Danyel Joffe, would prohibit the town from using funds to enforce any marijuana law affecting therapeutic or spiritual uses of cannabis, as long as its use harmed no one else. “I wanted to help them because it’s my belief that cannabis is not an evil weed. There are people who use it for spiritual purposes,” Joffe said. “Yes, some people abuse it, but that doesn’t mean other people should be harmed as a result.”  Nederland, which began life in the 1850s as a trading post where European settlers could do business with local Ute Indians, later turned into a mining town. In more recent decades it became a draw for hippies and those attracted to its quirky, easy-going ambience. This month the town hosted its annual Frozen Dead Guy Days festival, celebrating an effort by a Norwegian immigrant to preserve his grandfather’s corpse. The event features music, beer and events such as coffin races, a polar plunge and frozen salmon tossing. Town Administrator Alisha Reis said the Nederland attorney’s office does not have an opinion on Chippi’s proposed ordinance yet because she has not formally submitted it. “We are planning to process this initiative just like any other,” Reis told Reuters.


Steve Scalise Says Ady Barkan asked Joe Biden, “Do we agree that we can redirect some of the funding for police?”

Explanation: Activist Ady Barkan speaks through computer voice assistance. A video shared by Rep. Steve Scalise spliced together footage from different parts of Barkan’s July interview with Biden to make it seem like Barkan asked a question that he did not ask. The manipulation gave the impression that Biden wants to defund the police. Biden has rejected that idea. He has proposed investing more in a program for community police.

National, Criminal Justice, Federal Budget, Steve Scalise,

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., shared a video that used manipulated footage of activist Ady Barkan to falsely accuse former Vice President Joe Biden of wanting to defund the police. Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee, has repeatedly rejected that position. The video created the false impression by splicing together clips from a July interview between Biden and Barkan, who has Lou Gehrig’s disease, also known as ALS. Barkan speaks through the use of a computerized device that translates his eye movements into an artificial voice. The manipulation hinged on a portion of the interview where Biden talked about police reform. Scalise’s video spliced Barkan’s words to make it seem like he asked if Biden agreed "that we can redirect some of the funding for police." But that was not a question that Barkan posed. The video was altered to add "for police." "These are not my words," Barkan said in a tweet asking Scalise to remove the video and apologize to the disability community. "I have lost my ability to speak, but not my agency or my thoughts. You and your team have doctored my words for your own political gain." . @SteveScalise, These are not my words. I have lost my ability to speak, but not my agency or my thoughts. You and your team have doctored my words for your own political gain. Please remove this video immediately. You owe the entire disability community an apology. https://t.co/N6G5RgMXlO The manipulated video was first reported by the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel, who tweeted screenshots highlighting its deceptive editing. Twitter flagged the video as "manipulated," after which Scalise deleted it and posted a new version that omitted the spliced footage of Barkan. The video was flagged according to Twitter’s policy against "synthetic and manipulated media," a Twitter spokesperson confirmed. There's a clip here of @AdyBarkan, who has ALS and speaks via voice assistance, asking Biden about "re-directing" public safety funding. The clip alters the quote. It splices "for police" into it, using Barkan's artificial voice. https://t.co/WKkbRzlrXF https://t.co/mUysm9YDeQ pic.twitter.com/uofqi9428E A Scalise spokesperson said the edit combined two of Barkan’s questions for time and clarity, and Scalise stood by the false suggestion that Biden wants to defund the police on Twitter. "Look, it shouldn’t have been edited," Scalise said on Fox News. "But at the same time, the comments were always about — in fact, twice in that interview, he asked Joe Biden if he was for redirecting money away from police. And in both times, Joe Biden said yes." In fact, Biden has proposed additional police reforms and oversight and called for a $300 million investment in a community policing grant program. The Biden-Barkan interview was posted July 8 by NowThis News, which edited it down to about 27 minutes. The Biden campaign previously gave PolitiFact an unedited audio recording of the exchange, since NowThis trimmed some of Biden’s responses to condense the conversation. The unedited audio shows that when Barkan steered the conversation toward racism and police brutality, Biden made clear that he does not support defunding the police. It also shows that, despite what Scalise’s video suggests, Barkan never asked, "Do we agree that we can redirect some of the funding for police?" Scalise’s video, which can be viewed via the Internet Archive, spliced two of Barkan’s questions together. The questions came as Barkan proposed redirecting some police funds to social services. "We can reduce the responsibilities assigned to police and redirect some of the funding for police into social services, mental health counseling, and affordable housing," Barkan said, suggesting that one particular killing might not have happened had a "wellness counselor" showed up at the scene instead of an officer. "Are you open to that kind of reform?" "Yes, I proposed that kind of reform," Biden said, according to the unedited audio. "And by the way, the idea though, that’s not the same as getting rid of or defunding all the police." As Biden continued explaining his proposals for police reform, Barkan interjected: "But do we agree that we can redirect some of the funding?" "Yes. Absolutely," Biden said. "And by the way, not just redirect, condition them. If they don’t eliminate chokeholds, they don’t get Byrne grants. If they don’t do the following, they don’t get any help." Biden described a similar idea for oversight during an interview with CBS News in June. "No, I don’t support defunding the police," he said. "I support conditioning federal aid to police based on whether or not they meet certain basic standards of decency and honorableness and, in fact, are able to demonstrate they can protect the community and everybody in the community." Biden has proposed investing an additional $300 million in the Community Oriented Policing Services Program, or COPS. The program provides police departments with technical and training assistance, hiring grants and access to mental health and wellness resources. Biden has rejected the idea of defunding the police multiple times: in a spokesperson’s statement, in an op-ed, in a number of local and national news interviews, and in a questionnaire from an organization of law enforcement officers. Those in Barkan’s circle shared that takeaway. "Ady Barkan and Vice President Biden agreed on a lot, and disagreed on issues like Medicare for All and defunding the police," said Liz Jaff, the president of Barkan’s Be A Hero political fund, in a statement on Scalise's video that Barkan shared on Twitter. Previously, Jaff told CNN that "though Ady would have loved Joe Biden to announce in this interview that he is in favor of defunding the police, the vice president never said it." Scalise shared a video that said Barkan asked Biden, "Do we agree that we can redirect some of the funding for police?" That’s not what Barkan asked. The video spliced together audio from two different questions, taking advantage of the fact that Barkan speaks with computer voice assistance. Biden has repeatedly said he does not support defunding the police, including during his conversation with Barkan.


Geron shares fall after cancer drug study update.

Explanation: Shares of Geron Corp fell as much as 20 percent after the company said that enrollment had ceased in an early stage trial of its blood cancer drug and that about 20 of 79 patients enrolled in the study had dropped out.

Geron did not say why the patients had dropped out of the trial or if the sponsor, the Mayo Clinic, had stopped the study prematurely. Geron said the patients in the study would continue to receive the drug and be monitored according to the study design. Stifel Nicolaus & Co analyst Brian Klein said the limited information that Geron released in a regulatory filing on Monday could call into question the tolerability and durability of the treatment. “It looks like the therapy for a majority of the patients, or at least a good percentage of the patients, is going to be limited to less than a year,” he told Reuters. The Mayo Clinic had begun the trial for a group of blood cancers, known as myeloid malignancies, in November 2012. “The drug may only be appropriate for patients who have very severe disease,” Klein said. Geron said that data from the 79 patients would be enough to support the drug’s development. The company plans to conduct a mid-stage trial testing the drug, imetelstat, in patients with myelofibrosis - a rare blood disorder - in the first half of the year. Geron said in November that four of the first 18 patients with myelofibrosis enrolled in the Mayo Clinic’s study were free of the disease. Imetelstat is designed to inhibit telomerase, an enzyme that enables rapid multiplication of cancer cells. Geron’s shares were down 18 percent at $4.60 in late-morning trading on the Nasdaq.