“Spiral” CT scans reduce smoker deaths: study

Explanation: We wished that some of the strong elements included in this story could have found their way into some of the other coverage of a study about the effects of spiral CT scans on reducing lung cancer deaths. Conversely, we wish this story had included more of the information necessary to give readers a complete picture of the benefits of this type of screening for cancer. Smoking rates and the incidence of lung cancer have been falling in the US for several years. Despite these gratifying trends, about 225,000 Americans will be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2010 and approximately 157,000 will die from the disease. A major factor in survival after diagnosis is early detection. Chest X-rays are not sensitive enough to pick up lung cancer in its early stages. That is why more sophisticated diagnostic testing has been sought. Spiral computerized tomography (CT) has been touted as the best way to diagnose lung cancer early and save ives. This landmark study has demonstrated that spiral CT’s are indeed more senstive than chest X-rays and that early detection can save lives. The study is by no means a complete answer, and it raises many questions. Who should be screened, when, how often and who is going to pay the enormous bill are some of the obvious questions. Stories like this need to give the evidence an independent and critical analysis to help readers understand whether more screening is necessarily better for identifying lung cancer and saving lives.

The cost of diagnostic testing and the return on that investment in both clinical and financial terms should be routinely included in any story. Like many others, this story fails in this regard. Simply describing the cost of the diagnostic test does not provide the reader with an appreciation of the true cost of the testing. The number of people you need to scan to find one with an early stage lung cancer is 304. There are 33 million Americans who smoke daily. At $300 to $1,000 per scan, scanning everyone would cost $9.9 to $33 Billion annually. Any discussion on cost should also include comments on the false positive rate. In this case, 25% to 60% of subjects had a lesion that needed further workup. The financial costs of these false results should have been noted The story presented some of the raw, absolute numbers, although we wished it had gone further. It says, “As of last month, 354 people who got CTs had died of lung cancer, compared to 442 who got ordinary X-rays. This worked out to a 20.3 percent lower risk of dying for the spiral CT group and the researchers stopped the study.” What it should have added was that, assuming 50 percent of all participants were put in each group, that would mean 1.32% died in the CT scan group and 1.65% died in the X-ray group. That’s an absolute difference of 0.33%, not quite as exciting as a 20% reduction in deaths. Also, the number of people needed to treat to save one life (or NNT) is 304. That may be a justifiable number for added investment in spiral CT scans, but it should be part of the discussion. Nonethless, we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. The story misses the mark completely in its handling of the potential harms of the test. It does provide the important caveat that “Critics of the scans fear that smokers may not be motivated to quit if they believe screening can save their lives if they do get cancer.”  It fails to note the relatively high false positive rate (25% to 60%) and the implications on unnecessary additional testing. This is especially disappointing because the NCI press release provided the information. The story did a better job than some of the other coverage in evaluating the quality of the evidence, but it left readers confused by bringing up an older, potentially tainted study and not carefully comparing the two studies. It says, “In 2006, Dr. Claudia Henschke of New York Presbyterian Hospital-Weill Cornell Medical Center caused a stir when she published a study saying that 80 percent of lung-cancer deaths could be prevented through widespread use of spiral CT. Her ideas were controversial to start with and widely discredited when other researchers found her work had been paid for by a tobacco company.” But then it makes no attempt to talk about whether this new study is an improvement on Henschke’s work or what makes this study different. The press release from the National Cancer Institute provided those who bothered to read it with all of the important points of the study, both positive and negative. This story failed to take advantage of the information provided. The space dedicated to the 2006 study by Dr. Henschke could have better been used to more completely describe the study results and their implications. The story avoided disease mongering and provided some great context. It says, for example, “the single best way to prevent lung cancer deaths is to never start smoking, and if already smoking, to quit permanently.” It also says, “About 10 percent of smokers develop lung cancer, but smoking causes other cancers as well as heart disease and stroke.” The study raises many questions that will likely be debated for years by the experts. The failure to provide a single independent voice to the discussion is curious to say the least. The study compared spiral CT scanning to chest X-rays and did mention smoking cessation. This story did a better job than others in actually spelling out how commonly used these spiral CT scans are, noting that “Almost all advanced CT scanners can perform a spiral CT, and about 60 percent of U.S. hospitals have such a machine. Makers include General Electric Co’s GE Healthcare Siemens AG, Toshiba Corp, Hitachi and Philips.” The story does note previous work in the early detection of lung cancer using spiral CT scanning. The story did rely a little too heavily on press releases. For example, one quote from the study’s leader, Dr. Denise Aberle, is from this release. And her other quote and a quote from Dr. Christine Berg, are from this release. Only the Berg quote is attributed to “a statement.”  To lift quotes from news releases without attribution is not good practice.


Mississippi has passed a bill granting churchgoers the right to shoot and kill citizens at will.

Explanation: What's true: The "Mississippi Church Protection Act" includes provisions for the arming and training of designated security personnel in the state's churches and classes armed defense of a church's congregants as "justifiable homicide." What's false: The "Mississippi Church Protection Act" does not explicitly recognize "Soldiers of God" or enable congregants to kill at will with legal impunity.

On 30 March 2016, web site The Free Thought Project published an article reporting that the state of Mississippi had passed a bill granting churches the power to act as “soldiers of God,” with congregants gaining the ability to legally kill other citizens while taking part in religious services: As if police officers kidnapping, beating, and killing innocent people in America with impunity wasn’t enough, the state of Mississippi just passed a Bill that will grant churches equal protection from acts of violence. Mississippi House Bill 786, the “Mississippi Church Protection Act” legalizes killing people while acting as a participant of a church or place of worship — seriously. This Bill legally recognizes actual “soldiers of Christ” and grants them the power to kill. By passing this bill, the state of Mississippi effectively recognizes churches as their own sovereign entities — mini-states that are tax-free and immune from their acts of violence carried out in their official duties. “[T]his legislation would put ‘soldiers of God’ above the law, allowing them to act as judge, jury, and executioner,” said Larry T. Decker, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America. An article published on the same date by the Addicting Info web site provided a slightly less alarmist report: Mississippi Republicans are taking a “shoot first, ask questions later” approach to preventing potential church violence with a bill that amounts to legalizing religious “security” squads tasked with killing perceived threats. The state’s Republican-led senate passed the so-called “Mississippi Church Protection Act” which would militarize the state’s churches while also walking back gun regulations and stripping away oversight . The bill would allow churches to create security programs and designate and train members to carry concealed weapons. It would provide criminal and legal protections to those serving as church security. The bill also would allow concealed carry in a holster without a permit in Mississippi, expanding a measure passed last year that allowed concealed carry without a permit in a purse, satchel or briefcase, and another recent law that allows open carry in public … Mississippi church goers will now get to assign church members as “security” which can carry concealed weapons without permits and are protected from legal liability if their actions result in death based on a designation of “justifiable homicide” — the same legal standing that we afford police officers on duty. Both sites linked to the Mississippi legislature’s House Bill 786, which does not include any wording referencing “soldiers of Christ” or “soldiers of God” anywhere in its text:  AN ACT TO CREATE THE “MISSISSIPPI CHURCH PROTECTION ACT”; TO AMEND SECTION 45-9-101, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CONFORM TO THE PRECEDING SECTION; TO BRING FORWARD SECTION 97-37-7, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, FOR PURPOSES OF AMENDMENT; TO AMEND SECTION 97-37-9, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO REVISE THE LIST OF DEFENSES FOR A PERSON INDICTED OR CHARGED FOR A VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION OF LAW REGULATING THE USE OF FIREARMS; TO AMEND SECTION 97-3-15, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO PROVIDE THAT KILLING A PERSON WHILE ACTING AS A PARTICIPANT OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP SECURITY TEAM IS JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES. While The Free Thought Project maintained that the bill “legally recognizes actual ‘soldiers of Christ’ and grants them the power to kill” and that “the state of Mississippi effectively recognizes churches as their own sovereign entities,” the actual text of the bill creates a legally codified way of assembling security details (with the participation of the Mississippi Department of Public Safety) who may possess concealed weapons in places (such as churches) that were previously off-limits to concealed carry:  The Mississippi concealed firearms law has been amended to allow licensed gun owners who have “additional” training to carry concealed firearms in certain locations previously prohibited by law. These locations include courthouses, polling places, government meetings, any school, college or professional athletic event, bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, any elementary or secondary school facility, any junior college, community college, college or university facility, inside the passenger terminal of any airport, and in any church or other place of worship. It’s possible that some readers misinterpreted the bill’s phrase “to provide that killing a person while acting as a participant of a church or place of worship security team” to mean “participant of a church” or “participant of a security team,” but the bill references only trained security team members acting under the direction of church officials. Such persons would be shielded from civil liability stemming from the performance of their duties: The governing body of any church or place of worship may establish a security program by which designated members are authorized to carry firearms for the protection of the congregation of such church or place of worship, including resisting any unlawful attempt to kill a member(s) or attendee(s) of such church or place of worship, or to commit any felony upon any such member or attendee in the church or place of worship or in the immediate premises thereof. Any church or place of worship that establishes a security program that meets the requirements of subsection (2) of this section and any participant of such security program shall be immune from civil liability for any action taken by a member of such security program, if such action occurs during the course and scope of the member’s performance of their official duties as a member of the security program for the church or place of worship. In order to be eligible for the immunity provided in this section, such program shall at a minimum:  (i) require each participant of the program to have a firearms permit issued under Section 45-9-101; and (ii) require each participant to complete an instructional course in the safe handling and use of firearms as described in Section 97-37-7. The Charleston church shooting in June 2015 appeared to be at least part of the impetus behind the introduction of the bill, as that specific incident was cited by a Mississippi lawmaker: Rep. Andy Gipson of Braxton says he authored the bill in response to a church shooting in Charleston, South Carolina. He says the bill gives small churches and other houses of worship an extra option for security. While it is true the bill allows for armed security personnel to be present at church services, it isn’t aimed at allowing ordinary churchgoers to kill at will, nor does it specifically designate persons as “soldiers of God” or “soldiers of Christ” and grant them absolute legal immunity from prosecution for killing anyone during church services. Under the provisions of the bill, any person seeking legal protection from criminal prosecution for involvement in a fatal shooting committed during church services would still be subject to arrest and trial with the hope that a jury would agree his actions were justifiable.


I remember one of [Curt Schilling's] teammates said he painted his sock, the bloody sock.

Explanation: Chafee says Schilling teammate thought he faked bloody sock

Rhode Island, Baseball, Economy, Pop Culture, Lincoln Chafee,

Call it New England Politics 101. When you're running for office in Red Sox Nation, you don't take a Red Sox player's name in vain. Especially not the one who shed blood as he helped end that soul-crushing 86-year drought. But that's exactly what independent gubernatorial candidate Lincoln Chafee did in speaking about former Red Sox ace Curt Schilling in an interview on WPRO's The John DePetro show Tuesday. "I just remember his own teammates didn't like him," Chafee said of Schilling. "They thought he was a bit of a salesman. I remember one of his teammates said he painted his sock, the bloody sock, that he painted it. Kevin Millar I think said that. I don't know if I trust Curt Schilling." He was talking about the larger issue of Schilling's role in a controversial state economic development deal that will give Schilling's video game company, 38 Studios, a $75-million loan guarantee if he moves it to Rhode Island from Massachusetts. Chafee criticized the Schilling agreement for encumbering more than half of a new state loan guarantee program and risking it "on one company that's never had a penny of revenue yet." But what many will remember is that Chafee criticized the guy who got the Sox a win when they needed it most: Game 6 of the 2004 playoff series against the Yankees. Not to mention he maligned the sock that has since been enshrined in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Put it up there with failed Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley, who famously referred to Schilling as a Yankee fan and poked fun at her opponent, Scott Brown, for standing outside Fenway Park shaking hands. Diehard fans never forgave her. And Scott Brown is now Senator Brown. The Chafee camp was quick to retract the talk radio comment, sending The Providence Journal this statement by late morning: "Senator Chafee regrets that what he intended as an off-hand reference to published reports about the bloody sock has deflected attention from the crux of this issue." He went on to say: "Senator Chafee respects Curt Schilling's achievements as a professional athlete and his support of charitable causes. At the end of the day, however, his first concern is to protect the interest of Rhode Island taxpayers, on whose shoulders the burden of a 75 million dollar loan default would ultimately fall." We here at PolitiFact don't typically check one-time shots from the hip, so we considered ignoring this flap. But by Tuesday afternoon, as the Chafee gaffe made national news and readers urged us to jump on it, we decided to take at look at the rumor that's been swirling for years. It appears by all credible accounts that Chafee is, in fact, wrong. The story begins with an ankle injury Schilling suffered in a playoff series against the Angels. Team doctors temporarily fixed a ruptured and dislocated tendon in his right ankle to keep it from moving, allowing him to pitch in Game 6 of the American League Championship Series against the Yankees. Here's what The Providence Journal story about that October 2004 game said:  "Schilling, who apparently was bleeding through his sock, was pitching through discomfort. TV cameras caught him wincing as he followed the flight of Miguel Cairo's two-out double to left-center in the third inning, the first Yankee hit of the game." Ah yes, it's coming back now, chills and all. You know the ending. Schilling kept pitching, helping  to vault the Sox past the Yankees to capture the American League title and then win the World Series against the St. Louis Cardinals. Fast forward three years. The rumor that the blood on the sock was in fact red paint seems to have been started in 2007 by Baltimore Orioles TV announcer Gary Thorne, who said on air that Boston's then-backup catcher Doug Mirabelli told him it was a hoax. (That's Mirabelli, not Kevin Millar, as Chafee cited). Thorne later apologized, saying that Mirabelli told him in a later conversation that he was just joking. After much buzz on blogs and television, the report ended there. It's been brought up again from time to time, but never with much traction. We emailed Schilling Tuesday to get his reaction to the accusation, but we never heard back. For now, all indications are that the blood was real and that Chafee is wrong, a fact that he admits and apologizes for. In a follow-up phone call Tuesday night, a Chafee campaign spokesman said it best: "Some candidates shoot themselves in the foot. We shot ourselves in the sock." The Truth-O-Meter gives Chafee a , and scores him a big error in the public relations department.


Scarless weight-loss surgery: pacemaker for your hunger

Explanation: This TV segment focuses on an experimental obesity treatment: vagal blocking (VBLOC). The treatment involves implanting an electrical device which intermittently blocks the vagus nerve, which is involved with feelings of hunger and satiety. The segment does a few things well:   It introduces a patient who, one month into the therapy, has had promising but not spectacular results. It repeatedly mentions that the procedure is experimental, not yet available and unapproved for use in the U.S. It makes clear that VBLOC appears to be less effective than gastric bypass surgery, with possible weight loss of 20 percent at six months compared to 50 percent for bypass. But the segment could have been stronger:   It should have included at least one fully independent expert who could put the technique into perspective It should have provided more detail about the state and quality of the research upon which the promising results are based It should have emphasized the potential harms of the treatment, not the least of which is that it might not work for some people. For a treatment with a price tag of $15,000 to $20,000, that’s a significant risk. It’s worth noting that the host and reporter at the end of the piece discuss the fact that controlling physiological hunger is itself not a complete solution. People overeat for many reasons, including emotional ones. This is a responsible way to end the piece–with the thought that VBLOC may eventually be a useful treatment, but not a complete cure for obesity. But the piece also raises a larger question: Is it responsible to report on the VBLOC technique at this time? The current trial is on a small number of people. A larger trial has begun, but none of the data have been peer-reviewed or published. It may have been more prudent to wait until the research is published (if indeed it will be) before doing a story on this obesity treatment.

The broadcast reports a price of $15,000 to $20,000–and properly points out that this figure is speculative because the device is so early in testing. The reporter should be commended for drawing this information out of a reluctant source. The piece does not describe the findings of the early U.S. research (or other research overseas) in sufficient detail. It’s not known who was in the trial, how many patients were tested, how many benefited, how many were unable or unwilling to continue the therapy, etc. Some of this information was available in a San Franciso Chronicle article published on April 15, 2008. More information was available from a company press release announcing results from overseas research data. The report focuses on presumed efficacy but minimizes safety issues and risks. The piece repeatedly states that the treatment has few side effects. This may apply to the surgery itself, especially as compared with gastric bypass surgery. Yet there are several possible risks of the treatment itself that are not discussed, including the possibility that a side effect of blocking the vagus nerve will be discovered. It is also possible that the intermittent blocking of the nerve signals will become ineffective over time. The segment is based on some early results of clinical trails of the VBLOC procedure. It does not provide sufficient detail to help viewers understand the type and rigor of the trial or even how many people have been involved so far. While the segments says the procedure has shown "impressive" results in Australia, it does not indicate what evidence the claim is based on. Morbid obesity is a deadly condition. The piece does nothing to exaggerate its dangers. In fact, if anything it understates them. The segment included an interview with one patient in the clinical trial who has shown modest results and one physician who is an investigator in the trials. The segment should have included comments from at least one independent researcher or clinician familiar with treatments for morbid obesity, who could put this procedure in better context. The segment should have noted that the trials are being funded by the device maker. The segment compares VBLOC to gastric bypass surgery. While this is a proper comparison, the segment should have also compared it to gastric banding, drug treatments and diet and exercise. Information about efficacy, safety and costs of these treatments is widely available and would have made the piece much stronger. The segment states that the VBLOC treatment for obesity is in clinical trials and not available in the U.S. The segment correctly says the treatment is being tested in the U.S. and in some other countries. It also explains that the mechanism–the suppression of hunger by blocking the vagus nerve–is a novel approach to weight loss treatment. We can’t be sure if the story relied largely on a news release, but we do know the only physician interviewed is one who is an investigator in the trials (funded by the device maker) and thereby has a vested interest. In fact, this is one case where the story might have been stronger if it had included some of the information about results of the clinical trials that appeared in a company press release.


Trampolines add bounce to group fitness classes.

Explanation: Trampolining, said to have begun when Eskimos bounced each other on walrus skins for the fun of it, is putting a feel-good cardiovascular spring into group fitness classes, from body sculpting to dance, fitness experts say.

Also known as rebounding, it delivers a low-impact, calorie-burning workout that swaps the tedium of a treadmill or step class for a feeling of child-like euphoria. At Chelsea Piers Connecticut, an adult fitness class twins trampolining with rock climbing. “I wanted to do something fun. Everybody likes to climb as kids, everybody loves the bounce of the trampoline,” said Byron Knox, a director and instructor at the Stamford-based facility. No stranger to odd fitness combinations, Knox, who also coaches football and gymnastics, said the hybrid class works well. “The trampoline is predominantly leg-based, although we do core exercises on it. The rock climbing is predominantly upper body, although you do use your legs,” he said. Knox compared it to working a leg press followed by using upper body equipment, but said it is more entertaining. “Most people wouldn’t think of trampoline as a workout but it takes a lot of energy,” he said. “It could be equal (in cardiovascular intensity) to jumping rope. And part of the beauty is that the exerciser is in control.”  The more flexible can jump and split-jump higher, but Knox said just about anybody can participate, and trampolining also enhances balance and spatial awareness. At Chelsea Piers Connecticut the “tramp” precedes the rock wall. “That part takes a bit more coaxing,” Knox admits, although everyone is harnessed and spotted. At JumpLife studio in New York City, some 25 mini-trampolines connect with low lights and top 100 songs to draw out the inner dancer. “JumpDance is our signature class,” said founder and CEO Montserrat Markou, of the 45-minute non-stop cardio workout, which she said can burn up to 600 calories. She said the class doubles as a venue for bachelorette parties and girls’ nights out. “The low lights make people less self-conscious,” Markou said. Another class, called JumpGym, ditches the dance club vibe and incorporates weights and push-ups into the trampoline workout. “JumpGym attracts more men,” said Markou, whose mini-trampolines are equipped with a handlebar that can be grabbed should balance fail. “People can work out who couldn’t work out before,” said Markou, who hopes to draw in seniors and children. Rebounding classes at Crunch fitness centers pair mini-trampolines with sculpt, Pilates and interval classes. Group fitness manager Carol Johnson likens the bouncing motion to getting a massage. “It’s a bit more gentle on the body, more rehabilitative,” said Johnson, who’s been rebounding for about 10 years. Jessica Matthews, an exercise physiologist with the American Council on Exercise, said trampolining is a joint-friendly way to add the cardiovascular component to a group fitness workout. The intensity, she said, can vary from a brisk walk to a run. She said the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has used trampolines to build bone density in astronauts. Matthews cautions that while the impact is low, the surface of a trampoline is still unstable and cautioned that people who have lower-extremity instability must be aware of this. She said people also combine it with other activities. “Some do it while watching TV,” she added.


MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY: HEARTBROKEN FAMILY AWAITS FDA DECISION ON EXPERIMENTAL DRUG

Explanation: This story focuses on a family tragedy—three young boys in a single family with a fatal genetic disorder called Duchenne muscular dystrophy—and the family’s hope that an experimental drug, which the three boys have been taking as part of a clinical trial, will receive FDA approval later this month. The story is filled with emotional freight, pitting anecdotal evidence (the mother’s reflection on her sons’ vigor, which she attributes to the drug) against systematic evidence that that finds little in the way of robust benefits. While such a story offers readers a compelling look at the sometimes anguished process of clinical research in the face of a lethal disease, it gives too short shrift to the clinical research evidence available here. On the other hand, the story did a great job explaining the costs and insurance hurdles around drugs like this, as well as the possible mechanisms behind how this drug and similar ones work. Letting the emotional intensity of anecdotal information duke it out with systematic research findings is a proven reader-grabber. But selecting this narrative route requires dedication to a story line that never lets the reader forget that good, systematic evidence is paramount. Given the vividness of anecdotal accounts, the systematic details in a story like this must be a dominant and detailed part of the story. This text would have done a better job of achieving that, and doing so convincingly, with more evidentiary detail.

Cost plays an important role in this story, as the drug (should it come to market) would be expensive and there is considerable uncertainty about whether insurance would pay for it. Most of the “benefit” information in this story is provided by the mother of the three boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, who reflects in detail on a level of activity among her sons that she feels demonstrates the drug’s effectiveness. The reporter reflects briefly on clinical trial results that offered “some slight positive results,” but we never learn what those are. The text briefly mentions side effects associated with the drug, increases in blood pressure and cholesterol levels, an assertion contested by the drug’s manufacturer, PTC Therapeutics. However, it would have been more helpful to quantify and more clearly describe these side effects, and tap independent experts for their viewpoints. We found the NCHR’s testimony about the risks of combining this drug with other drugs these kids commonly take to be important, for example. On the one hand, the story does a good job of making the point that clinical trial results are murky, leading the National Center for Health Research to recommend that the FDA vote “no” on approving the drug. But on the other, the text makes no effort to help readers understand the nature of the evidence on which such a decision would be based. Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a killer. Quite a few sources were interviewed for the story. And, all sources are clearly identified, including the CEO of the company that is apparently funding the clinical trials. However, we do think the story would have been stronger had it tapped the viewpoints of an expert in muscular dystrophy who has no vested interested in the drug receiving approval. There is no known cure for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The story does devote some space to another drug, Exondys 51, which has been approved by the FDA, but the text is clear that the type of DMD that afflicts the three boys is not responsive to that drug. A main point of narrative tension in the story is the family’s wait to see if the FDA will approve the drug. So it is clear that the drug is not yet available. The story makes it clear that this drug is unique, in that it aims to override the specific genetic mutations causing this type of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The story clearly does not rely on a news release.


Consuming tainted lettuce caused more deaths in 2018 than homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants.

Explanation: In reality, undocumented immigrants killed a vastly greater number of people than tainted lettuce did, even though undocumented immigrants in general commit crime, including violent crime, at a lower rate than native-born U.S. citizens.

Politics, border wall, government shutdown, immigration

President Donald Trump and some of his supporters have frequently talked up the alleged threat posed by undocumented immigrants crossing the southern border of the United States. Arguing in support of his long-promised border wall, President Trump, for example, has claimed that “Sixty-three thousand Americans since 9/11 have been killed by illegal aliens,” a claim we have previously found to be false. In reality, repeated studies have shown that undocumented immigrants in the United States actually commit crime, including violent crime, at a lower rate than citizens of the United States. This clash between the “violent illegals” rhetoric of right-leaning supporters of President Trump’s proposed border wall and the empirical reality has given rise to a series of statistical counter-claims, especially popular among left-leaning opponents of Trump on social media. For example, we have previously examined the veracity of a viral meme that claimed lack of access to affordable health care was responsible for a greater number of deaths than terrorism and homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants combined. In January 2019, several weeks into the federal government shutdown prompted by a dispute between President Trump and Congressional Democrats over funding the proposed border wall, another eye-catching statistical comparison gained popularity on social media: “Lettuce killed more Americans [in 2018] than undocumented immigrants.”  Last year lettuce killed more Americans than undocumented immigrants so it’s a good thing we’re halting food inspections over a wall that won’t work. — Ally Maynard (@missmayn) January 10, 2019   Despite the grammatical ambiguity in these claims, it’s clear the assertion being made was that in 2018, a greater number of deaths resulted from the consumption of tainted lettuce than from homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), two multi-state outbreaks of the E.coli bacterium occurred in 2018 involving lettuce. The first outbreak ended in June and led to five deaths as well as hospitalization of 96 people, 27 of whom developed a kind of kidney failure called hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). HUS can be life-threatening, but according to the World Health Organization, only 3 to 5 percent of people who develop HUS die during the course of the disease, although that rate is higher among young children and the elderly. The second outbreak began in October and appeared to have ended by December, leading to 62 cases of infection, 25 hospitalizations (including two cases of HUS), but no deaths. So in total, the CDC documented a total of five deaths from consuming tainted lettuce in 2018. No official nationwide tally of the number of homicides committed by undocumented immigrants is kept, so those figures are less clear. However, we do have some useful data which we have previously examined in greater detail. In 2018, the Cato Institute published a report that used official Texas Department of Public Safety data and found that in 2015, undocumented immigrants were convicted of 46 homicides in the state of Texas, a rate of 2.6 convictions per 100,000 undocumented immigrants (a lower homicide conviction rate than among U.S. citizens in Texas). The author of the report stipulated that, “The conviction and arrest rates for the entire period of January 1, 2011, through November 15, 2017, are nearly identical to those of 2015, so the choice of year makes little difference.” Assuming that there was no sudden and drastic change in the figures between 2011-2017 and 2018, the findings for 2015 are a reasonable proxy for homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants in 2018. Further, we know that an estimated 10.7 million undocumented immigrants lived in the United States in 2016. If the rate of homicide conviction seen in Texas was the same as the nationwide rate, this would work out to be around 278 homicide convictions of undocumented immigrants throughout the United States in 2016, and a similar number in 2018. (The estimated undocumented immigrant population of the U.S. has been declining in recent years, from 12.2 million in 2007 to 10.7 million in 2016, or roughly .16 annually. If that trend continued and the number fell to around 10.4 in 2018, that would still equate to an estimated 273 homicide convictions that year.) It’s true that these figures relate to homicide convictions, and not, strictly speaking, homicides. However, for every murder that took place in 2016 but didn’t culminate in a conviction until 2018, it’s reasonable to assume that there was another murder that took place in 2018 but won’t culminate in a conviction until 2020. In other words, the number of homicide convictions in any given year will not be significantly different from the number of prosecutable homicides in that same year. Whatever the exact number of homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants in 2018 was (and there is a reasonable statistical basis to estimate it was around 270), it is safe to say that it was a vastly higher figure than the mere five deaths the CDC recorded as being caused by lettuce tainted with E.coli. If one takes a step back from the criminal justice system for a moment, one can view the “lettuce-vs.-undocumented-immigrants” comparison in another light. Between 2014 and 2016, the number of homicides recorded by the CDC increased each year from 15,872 to 19,362, so it may be reasonable to estimate around 20,000 homicides took place in 2018. In order for the number of homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants to be lower than the number of lettuce-related deaths (five), it would require that undocumented immigrants commit only 0.02 percent of homicides, despite making up more than 3 percent of the total U.S. population. That is, undocumented immigrants would need to have accounted for a share of homicides that was 165 times lower than their proportion of the U.S. population. We know from the Texas data that undocumented immigrants do account for a lower share of homicide convictions (5.9 percent) than their share of the population (6.4 percent) — but not 165 times lower. Despite the absence of official nationwide data on homicides perpetrated by undocumented immigrants, we have more than enough robust data to conclude that the claim lettuce killed more people in the United States in 2018 than undocumented immigrants did is false.


Medtronic recalls heparin-coated bypass equipment.

Explanation: Medtronic Inc said on Wednesday it was  voluntarily recalling some disposable devices used during  cardiac bypass surgery because they have been found to be  coated with contaminated traces of the blood-thinner heparin.

Medtronic said the devices are coated with its Carmeda  BioActive surface, which includes heparin used to help prevent  blood clots among patients undergoing bypass procedures. The company said it has not received reports of any  contamination-related physical harm linked to its Carmeda  products, but it was recalling them as a precaution. The coating is used on blood oxygenators, reservoirs, pumps  and other disposable products that are used during the bypass  surgery, the company said. A company spokesman said the products have relatively small  sales, and that a separate Medtronic line of disposable  bypass-surgery products covered with a different biosurface  called Trillium would remain on the market because they  incorporate far smaller amounts of heparin. Medtronic said the recall was in response to an April 8  recommendation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that  medical devices employing heparin be checked with  newly-developed tests to make sure the heparin is not tainted  with potentially harmful contaminants. The FDA issued its recommendation after reports of serious  injury and death in patients who had received injectable  heparin products containing high levels of a contaminant called  oversulfated chondroitin sulfate. The agency has collected reports that tainted heparin was  used by at least 81 U.S. patients who died soon afterward. They  had classic allergic reactions, with plunging blood pressure,  swelling of the larynx and other severe symptoms. Their cases forced manufacturer Baxter International to  recall the commonly used blood-thinner and caused a diplomatic  squabble between officials in the United States and China,  where much of the world’s supply of heparin is made. The chondroitin contaminant, derived from animal cartilage,  has a structure very similar to that of heparin. Heparin is  obtained from pig intestines. It thus cannot be identified with  the tests normally used to inspect batches of heparin.


The Baseball Diet Is Proving To Be A Heavy Favorite For Shedding Pounds In 2015

Explanation: Vague claims that ““it works”” and unsupported assertions that this diet program has advantages over others don”t add up to any solid reasons to swing at The Baseball Diet. This matters because there’s some evidence that some writers actually bit on the bait and wrote about this diet. So it’s not just an academic pursuit; it’s worth raising the bar for all who write news releases and for all who receive them. Demand evidence – more than anecdotes.

The website reveals that the materials for this diet plan cost almost $50, including shipping. This price should have been included in the release. The news release says that the diet is based on common food items, implying the food cost wouldn”t be substantially more expensive than the dieter’s regular diet. However, this impression cannot be checked without reviewing the plan materials. The release merely says “it works.” The release notes that the author lost 70 pounds 12 years ago, although it appears that his personal weight loss was the result of applying techniques discussed in an earlier book, not the specific methods pitched in this release. And, while Lou Piniella is trotted out of the bullpen to impress with his name, no data about his results are provided in the news release. It is important to note that while the release claims that “The Baseball Diet” will produce results within nine weeks, in order to improve health a diet plan must help people maintain lower weight indefinitely. There is no discussion of potential harms. The release asserts that, “”The more simple and realistic a diet is, the more likely that you will form new habits.”” But there is no evidence provided to support this statement or that this diet plan actually helps buyers “form new habits.” OK, they got one batter out here — one Satisfactory rating. Weight loss is indeed recommended for most Americans, and as the release states, it is indeed difficult, with most diet plans failing to deliver long term benefits. While readers can reasonably assume that the author of the materials will be paid a share of the sales proceeds, the release should have specifically disclosed whether the celebrity quoted in the release (Lou Pinella) was paid for his endorsement. There is no specific comparison to other weight loss programs or other approaches that might be beneficial for weight loss. It”s clear that “The Baseball Diet” materials are for sale now. A link to the product web site is included. The release makes vague statements meant to distinguish this program from other weight loss approaches, saying it is generally simpler and more fun. However, nothing is presented that shows this approach is novel. Easy, fun, competitive (? ), will help anyone look good and feel great – all without data or any supporting information other than two anecdotes, at least one of which is heavily conflicted.


Early breast cancers may need less lymph node surgery

Explanation: Improved quality of life, with no reduction in survival. This story hits the high points of an important study looking at overall survival in some breast cancer patients who face lymph node dissection of multiple nodes with its not infrequent life-long complications. Strong points:  emphasized this finding applied only to “some” women even in first sentence then later emphasized “the findings apply to only a small number of breast cancer patients” mentioned that results had been presented at a medical conference last summer and that “some surgeons are already changing their practices”  Areas for improvement:  could have discussed impacts on cost and on insurance decisions discuss the possible limitations to the research that the authors mentioned tell readers how often complications occur from axillary lymph node dissection and from sentinel node approach   Until now, if a patient has a positive node on a sentinel node biospy they then have additional lymph node surgery. Based on this study, which suggests there is no overall  or disease-free survival benefit to  ALND for the patients named above, there would be no reason for them to go through the additional suffering that often accompanies the procedure.

The article didn’t discuss any differences in the financial cost of the two approaches. Nor did it discuss whether insurers are likely to curtail coverage based on the new findings. The story presented a brief quantification of the overall survival rate but would have been improved by using numbers of breast cancer patients who might be affected. The story presented a clear statement regarding the lack of long-term evidence. However, it did not clearly quantify the potential harms of sentinel node biopsy and axillary lymph node dissection and compare them. How often do complications occur? The story was specific about study population and the current and possible future effects on clinical practice. However, it didn’t address the fact that recruitment was stopped early because it would have taken 20 years to get the 500 deaths required to fully power the analyses, given that overall survival was so much higher than expected. The researchers were quite clear in their published manuscript about the possible limitations in their study. There was no evidence of disease-mongering in this story. The story identifies its journal source, and includes interviews with several independent clinical sources, as well as a statement from the Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society. It did explain the NCI funding for the trial. The article briefly mentions standard-of-care treatment and how that might be affected by this study. The article appropriately defines to whom these findings would apply and briefly indicates not all physicians would be likely to adopt the findings immediately. The article uses helpful quotes from breast cancer experts to establish the significant effect of this new information on clinical practice. The story does not rely solely on a news release.


Using the "African method" of sitting over a steaming cooking pot can help you avoid contracting COVID-19.

Explanation: Does Using the ‘African Method’ Help Avoid Contracting COVID-19?

Stories about people beating COVID-19 through “traditional” remedies continue to spread online in spite of warnings from health officials.For example, a post from news site NewsOne features what it claims is a “viral video.” In reality, the three-minute clip embedded in the story had now amassed more than a few thousand views since being uploaded to YouTube on April 3 2020.The video, promoting what it calls an “African method” which purportedly helps people avoid contracting the virus, shows a young man under a blanket at first, before emerging and revealing that he was sitting over a large cooking pot with steam emanating from it.“I was in there like shaking, but I feel good,” he says before someone off-camera urges him to “tell them” how it supposedly works:Essentially, since the coronavirus is a virus-type thing, Viruses can’t survive in heat. That’s why viruses outbreaks tend to die out in the summer. So, what this essentially does is it takes all the powers of fruits, all the power of veggies, you put it in a heated environment and then you create a makeshift sauna and it creates that same type environment so the virus can break down and eventually, you yourself will grow the antibodies necessary in order for you to fight said virus.The scene in the living room then fades to a close-up of a woman telling viewers she did not film it, but “saw it trending [and] wanted to talk about it,” and also touting herbal-based remedies.The World Health Organization has already refuted the claim that the virus is vulnerable to heat, saying:From the evidence so far, the COVID-19 virus can be transmitted in ALL AREAS, including areas with hot and humid weather. Regardless of climate, adopt protective measures if you live in, or travel to an area reporting COVID-19. The best way to protect yourself against COVID-19 is by frequently cleaning your hands. By doing this you eliminate viruses that may be on your hands and avoid infection that could occur by then touching your eyes, mouth, and nose.Health officials have also debunked the claim that the type of “treatment” seen in the video is effective in dealing with the virus. The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health said in a statement:The media has reported that some people are seeking “alternative” remedies to prevent infection with COVID-19 or to treat the virus. Some of these purported remedies include herbal therapies and teas. There is no scientific evidence that any of these alternative remedies can prevent or cure the illness caused by COVID-19. In fact, some of them may not be safe to consume.According to the WHO regional office for Africa, at least 8,419 cases of COVID-19 had been confirmed across 45 countries on the continent as of April 10 2020, with 410 deaths linked to the disease.NewsOne does cite a separate an analysis by Reuters debunking the claim that “steam therapy” is effective against COVID-19. (In fact, not only can it confer a false sense of safety that is in and of itself dangerous during a pandemic, the treatment — which uses scalding steam — actually carries a risk of injury.) But the blog also claims that “there is a case to be made for holistic-style treatments to ward off and treat the coronavirus, but they have neither been proven effective on a widespread scale nor approved by the FDA.”Reports concerning the recovery of Raeburn Fairweather, a respiratory therapist at the Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, also made note of his use of “traditional Caribbean home remedies made with turmeric, garlic and ginger” without explaining how that helped him deal with the disease, which he contracted in the course of his work. Fairweather has subsequently been cleared to return to work, and the center has highlighted the New York Post’s story on him.We contacted the center to ask if it had begun recommending these traditional remedies for patients diagnosed with the virus. We have not yet heard back.


Second man arrested in probe of Mac Miller’s overdose death.

Explanation: An Arizona man has become the second person arrested on drug charges as authorities investigate the overdose death of rapper Mac Miller.

Arizona, Opioids, Music, General News, Entertainment, Mac Miller, Arrests, AP Top News, Prescription drugs, Celebrities, Cameron James Pettit, U.S. News, Prince

Police gave no details on the connection between him and 26-year-old Miller, who died a year ago in his Los Angeles home of an accidental overdose of cocaine, alcohol and fentanyl, a powerful opioid that’s contributed to a deadly epidemic in the U.S. and claimed other musicians, like Prince. Ryan Reavis, 36, was charged this week with possessing marijuana and prescription drugs as well as weapons offenses and fraud but has not been directly accused of causing Miller’s death. Neither has Cameron James Pettit, 28, who was charged this month with selling drugs to Miller shortly before his death. Authorities in Arizona and federal agents served a search warrant Monday at Reavis’ home in Lake Havasu City, where they said they seized prescription pills, marijuana, a doctor’s prescription pad, a pistol and two shotguns, large amounts of ammunition and a homemade firearm suppressor similar to a silencer. Reavis was being held on $50,000 bail, and police did not know if he had an attorney who could comment on his behalf. Pettit, who was charged in federal court on Sept. 4, has not yet entered a plea, and his attorney has declined comment. He’s scheduled to be arraigned Oct. 10. Miller’s rhymes included frank discussion of his depression and drug use, earning him fans among some of the biggest names in hip-hop. A Pittsburgh native whose real name was Malcolm James Myers McCormick, Miller was also in a two-year relationship with singer Ariana Grande that ended earlier in 2018. After his death, she posted an affectionate video of him on her Instagram page and released a song, “Thank U Next,” that lovingly mentioned him. Miller is among the musicians whose deaths have been linked in recent years to a national wave of opioid abuse. Prince died in 2016 when he took counterfeit pills laced with fentanyl that looked like a generic version of the painkiller Vicodin. Matthew Roberts, guitarist for the band 3 Doors Down, also died of an overdose in 2016 and had fentanyl and hydrocodone in his system. ___ This story has been corrected to show the name of the city is Lake Havasu City, not Havasu City. ___ Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: https://twitter.com/andyjamesdalton .


Facebook post says Joe Biden has said 150 million Americans died from guns and another 120 million from COVID-19

Explanation: A Facebook post said presidential candidate Joe Biden said 150 million people died from gun violence and 120 million people died from COVID-19   In February, Biden incorrectly said in the final Democratic primary debate that 150 million Americans have been killed with guns. Biden’s campaign admitted this was a mistake after the debate and the number was supposed to be 150,000 people. Presidential candidate Joe Biden incorrectly said on June 25 at a campaign event that 120 million people died from COVID-19. As of June 25, more than 119,000 died according to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center’s U.S. map. After making the ‘120 million’ claim, Biden immediately corrected himself. The Facebook ad was correct in that Biden made these claims. The numbers in these claims are incorrect.

Guns, Wisconsin, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,

Former Vice President Joe Biden has drawn mockery and criticism — primarily from conservatives — for verbal missteps throughout his presidential campaign. One recent Facebook post pulled out two statistical claims in particular, connected to gun violence and COVID-19. The July 13, 2020, post said with a laughing emoji: "America has around 300 million people. Joe Biden said 150 MILLION were lost to gun violence AND we just lost ANOTHER 120 million to covid-19. So I’m reaching out to my friends to see if ANY of you are still alive" This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook). This is obviously a joke, but it raises a question about Biden’s comments. Did he really claim both of those statistics at some point? Yes, Biden made these claims on two separate occasions, though for one he corrected himself immediately. Biden made the claim regarding the U.S. COVID-19 death toll on June 25, 2020, at a campaign event in Pennsylvania. He was talking about health care coverage with families. An ABC News Facebook Live video shows an attendee at the event mentioned the stress she felt over finances in addition to stress from hospital treatments, and how it all lowered her already low mental health at that time. Biden answered he intended to invest in mental health. "That’s why we have a major multibillion dollar investment in mental health," Biden said. "What people drastically underestimate is the impact on the mental health of people who now, everything is complicated. People don’t have a job. People don’t have anywhere to go. They don’t know what they’re going to do." He went on to say "Now we have over 120 million dead from COVID, I mean, 120,000 dead from COVID," according to audio obtained by Snopes.com. Biden made the gun violence claim in the final Democratic primary debate on Feb. 25, 2020, in South Carolina, where he said that 150 million Americans died since 2007 due to gun violence. "In addition to that, I passed the Brady Bill with waiting periods. I led that fight. But my friend on my right," Biden said, gesturing to U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, "and others have in fact also gave in to the gun manufacturers absolute immunity. Imagine if I stood here and said we give immunity to drug companies. We give immunity to tobacco companies. That has caused carnage on our streets; 150 million people have been killed since 2007 when Bernie voted to exempt gun manufacturers from liability. More than all the wars, including Vietnam, from that point on." So, the Facebook post is correct in that he made these claims, though it omits the date range Biden used and doesn’t give Biden credit for immediately correcting the COVID data error. In both cases, Biden or his staff acknowledged he intended to say thousands, not millions. As Biden noted a moment after referencing millions of COVID deaths the current death toll remains in the thousands. As of June 25, 2020 when he made this statement, the death toll was more than 119,000, according to the John Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center dashboard. On the gun violence claim, a member of Biden’s campaign said Biden meant to say 150,000 people. Biden has previously referenced that stat correctly. Data from the CDC shows from 2007 to 2018 there were 148,182 firearm homicides. A Facebook post said Biden said 120 million Americans died from COVID-19 and that 150 million Americans died from gun violence since 2007. Both of those numbers are drastically wrong. Biden meant to say "thousands" in both cases, not "millions." The post is correct that Biden did make these claims, but after misstating the COVID stat he immediately corrected himself.


Adam Hasner Says George LeMieux "even compared Marco Rubio to Barack Obama.

Explanation: Adam Hasner says George LeMieux compared Marco Rubio to Barack Obama

Candidate Biography, Florida, Adam Hasner,

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Adam Hasner is attacking GOP opponent George LeMieux by invoking two names likely to displease conservative primary voters. Barack Obama and Charlie Crist. In an Internet ad released June 10, 2011, Hasner tries to link LeMieux to Crist -- the former governor who left the GOP while trying to win a Senate seat in 2010. Marco Rubio, a former House speaker who served as a state legislator from 2000 to 2008 and is now a national Republican star, won that seat. The ad shows a photo of Crist and then states:  Defended President Obama's Stimulus As "Helpful to Florida" Fought For Taxpayer Funded Bailout Of Big Sugar  Architect Of Obama-Style Cap And Trade Plan For Florida  Falsely Attacked Marco Rubio  Even Compared Marco Rubio To Barack Obama  Charlie Crist -- Right? Wrong. As the word "wrong" appears, the camera zooms out on the picture of Crist. There is LeMieux, whispering in Crist's ear. The ad finishes -- "Get to know the Real George LeMieux." The goal of the message is clear enough: Paint a portrait of LeMieux -- Crist's former chief of staff who was later appointed by Crist to serve in the U.S. Senate -- as an Obama-loving Crist buddy who criticized Florida's GOP superstar, Rubio. But is it accurate? For this Truth-O-Meter item we will examine the claim Hasner made that LeMieux "even compared Marco Rubio to Barack Obama." In a related Truth-O-Meter item, we're checking another claim that LeMieux "falsely attacked Marco Rubio." Hasner's ad cited a Nov. 17, 2009, St. Petersburg Times article as the source for LeMieux comparing Rubio to Obama. Back then, LeMieux was supporting Crist over Rubio. And back then, Crist was still running as a Republican. LeMieux critiqued Rubio in an item posted to the Times' online blog, The Buzz. From The Buzz: "Being governor means you have to make choices. And you have to make decisions," LeMieux said, heading into a GOP lunch at the U.S. Capitol. "It's very easy to be a critic and the speaker now is not in office. He wasn't there when the state was facing the challenges of the huge recession and the stimulus. He didn't have to vote on that. All of the folks that were in his administration voted for the stimulus money. And I suspect if he were there, he could vote for it. This is just like President Obama being able to be against the war in Iraq because he didn't have to vote on it. There's a lot of parallels to draw between Speaker Rubio and President Obama in the way they are running their race and in their ability to throw bombs without ever having to lead because they are out of office." LeMieux was arguing that it was easy for Rubio, who left the Legislature in 2008, to criticize Crist for taking stimulus money when Rubio was no longer in the Legislature -- just like it was easy for Obama to oppose going to war against Iraq because he wasn't in the U.S. Senate or White House then. (Obama was in the Illinois Legislature when Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched in 2003.) LeMieux isn't comparing Rubio and Obama on a stance or an issue here (like they both supported cap-and-trade, or something like that). He is making a general point that it's easy for candidates to later oppose something they didn't have to vote on. None of that is made clear in the ad. But that's not the only problem when considering this claim. "George endorsed Marco the day after Charlie left the Republican Party and aggressively campaigned for Marco in the General Election," LeMieux campaign manager Brian Seitchik e-mailed us June 13. LeMieux hosted a fundraiser for Rubio, campaigned with him and introduced him at events, Seitchik wrote. (Note: Crist left the GOP on April 29. The next day LeMieux issued this statement: "I am saddened that my friend, Governor Crist, has decided to leave the Republican Party. Our friendship runs deep, but my commitment to the principles of the Republican Party runs deeper. I cannot walk down the path he has chosen. ... I will support our Republican nominee and will continue to do everything I can both in Florida and across the country to increase the number of Republicans in the United States Senate." A formal endorsement of Rubio didn't come until July, however, according to The Hill which cited the conservative blog, The Shark Tank.) There are other examples of LeMieux supporting Rubio. On July 12, 2010, The Buzz reported that LeMieux's PAC gave $2,400 to Rubio's campaign. The conservative blog the Shark Tank reported on the same day that LeMieux endorsed Rubio -- see a video of LeMieux here calling Rubio a "good conservative candidate." And LeMieux campaigned for Rubio at a few Central Florida stops -- including The Villages retirement community -- the Palm Beach Post reported Oct 7. At one of events, LeMieux called Rubio '"the brightest star of our generation in politics — and not just in Florida, nationwide,'" the Post wrote. Lastly, we have to point out that simply comparing Rubio, a Republican, to Obama, a Democrat, doesn't have to be a bad thing. The New Republic, for instance, called Rubio the "Republican Obama" in a February 2010 article. And a national conservative figure, Richard Land, was quoted in 2010 talking up a Rubio run for president in 2012, noting that Rubio would have "more experience than Obama had" when Obama ran for president. (PolitiFact Florida rated that claim Barely True.) On the whole, this claim is puzzling. Let's again look at the text of the ad, which starts by linking LeMieux to three issues -- the federal stimulus package, Big Sugar and cap and trade. Then the ad abruptly switches to general statements about Rubio saying that LeMieux falsely attacked Rubio and "compared Rubio to Barack Obama." LeMieux didn't compare Rubio and Obama on an issue such as those listed at the start of the ad -- he said they both used a familiar campaign tactic, throwing "bombs" about something they didn't have to vote on themselves. The ad provides no explanation for how he compared the two politicians and neglects to note that LeMieux supported Rubio's campaign once Crist left the GOP. We rate this statement Barely True.


Fiancee sues over principal’s death in bone marrow procedure.

Explanation: A hospital failed to adequately monitor and treat a New Jersey high school principal as his oxygen level plummeted during a bone-marrow donation procedure in February, sending him into a coma and leading to his death several weeks later, a lawsuit filed Monday by his fiancee alleges.

Hackensack, New Jersey, Health, General News, U.S. News, Lawsuits

Westfield High School Principal Derrick Nelson died in April after lapsing into a coma during the procedure at Hackensack University Medical Center, which Sheronda Braker named in her suit. Nelson, who was 44 and had a 5-year-old daughter with Braker, didn’t know the French teenager to whom he planned to donate the bone marrow. They were connected through Be the Match, a worldwide bone marrow registry network. Due to privacy obligations, it isn’t known if the teen received any bone marrow from Nelson. In an emailed statement, a spokeswoman for Hackensack Meridian Health said Nelson “leaves a remarkable legacy as an educator and veteran. We are unable to say more at this time due to the litigation process; however, we have been in communication with the family through their legal representation.” Nelson also served as an officer in the Army Reserve for more than 20 years and had recently re-enlisted. He was supposed to marry Braker on June 29. On Monday, Braker said his tuxedo remains in a box in her house. “Derrick was an amazing human being; very generous, loving, giving of himself,” Braker said. “He was the type of person that just wanted to make a difference.” Before the procedure in February, Nelson told the school’s newspaper that he had several health issues that complicated his planned donation. His sleep apnea prevented doctors from using general anesthesia, and they instead were to harvest stem cells intravenously. However, at his final physical exam on Jan. 21, Nelson was asked if he had sickle cell anemia, a blood disorder. “I said well I don’t have sickle cell, but I have the sickle cell trait,” Nelson told the newspaper. He said the doctors told him that meant they couldn’t harvest the stem cells. They ultimately decided to do the bone marrow surgery under a local anesthetic, he said. The lawsuit alleges the hospital was negligent because staff continued to administer anesthesia while Nelson’s oxygen level decreased and failed to supply him with additional oxygen. Bone marrow donation is considered a low risk procedure. About 2.4% of donors experience a serious complication due to anesthesia or damage to bone, nerve, or muscle in their hip region, according to the National Marrow Donor Program’s website. “Dr. Nelson lived and died as a hero, and now his family has filed this lawsuit in an effort to seek justice,” David Mazie, an attorney representing the family, said Monday. ___ This story has been corrected to show that Nelson’s daughter is 5 years old, not 6.


Every day, "about 100 people will be arrested for possession of marijuana in Georgia.

Explanation: Fuzzy use of data undercuts marijuana arrests claim

Georgia, Criminal Justice, Drugs, Marijuana, James Bell,

Weed, pot, ganja, sticky icky, cannabis. Call it what you want, some statewide advocates want it called legal. It was more than a month before 4/20 (Weed) Day, but supporters for legalizing marijuana were out in Atlanta recently making their case to rewrite the state’s marijuana laws.Georgia has spent billions of tax dollars enforcing "draconian" and ineffective prohibition laws against marijuana, the supporters said during Cannabis Awareness Day at the state Capitol. "In Georgia, more than 35,000 arrests occur for marijuana offenses each year. Eighty-five percent of those arrests are for possession, accounting for 55 percent of all drug arrests," James Bell, the director of Georgia C.A.R.E. (Campaign for Access, Reform and Education), said in a news release. "Today, March 14, about 100 people will be arrested for possession of marijuana in Georgia." PolitiFact Georgia wanted to know whether that many people are actually being arrested each day. For decades marijuana has been one of the most popular drugs in the nation, even for the most famous among us. Former President Bill Clinton admitted to smoking -- although not inhaling -- it while in college. And President Barack Obama supposedly ran around his high school with the Choom Gang of marijuana-smoking buddies. In November, voters in Colorado and Washington state approved legislation legalizing marijuana for recreational use. The drug is already legal for medical use in 18 states. But marijuana remains illegal under federal laws, although Obama has said federal law enforcers have "bigger fish to fry" than chasing down marijuana users. Georgia prosecutes marijuana offenses under its Controlled Substances Act, and it has various fines and punishments for growing, buying, selling and possessing the drug. (Georgia also passed its own medical marijuana law in 1980, but the law has never been implemented.) Bell said his numbers are derived from estimates of FBI arrest data for the state of Georgia. Doing the math on his claim, 85 percent of the 35,000 annual arrests would equal 29,750 arrests for marijuana possession. Dividing that number by 365 days, equals about 81.5 possession arrests each day. "We’re fed up with the whole war on drugs," he said. His group wanted state lawmakers to consider revising the marijuana laws as part of criminal justice reform, but none of them sponsored any legislation. We reviewed FBI crime data and found that marijuana accounted for 52.1 percent of all arrests for drug abuse violations nationwide in 2010. And 45.8 percent of those marijuana arrests were for possession. That marijuana arrests figure dropped a bit to 49.5 percent in 2011, with 43.3 percent of those marijuana arrests being for possession. Marijuana policy researcher Jon Gettman forwarded to PolitiFact data he compiled from FBI data on the same subject. According  to that data, Georgia’s marijuana arrests were:   Year        All marijuana arrests        Marijuana possession arrests  2008            30,289                    26,978 2009            33,200                    28,892 2010            31,506                    28,091  Gettman, a criminal justice professor at Shenandoah University, has also been a past president and national director of NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. But calculating arrests is a tricky undertaking, Robert Friedmann, a criminology professor at Georgia State University, reminds us. Arrest numbers are nebulous, he said, depending on the way they are counted: Are multiple arrests for a single person counted individually? Do the numbers include local, state and federal activities? Do all jurisdictions report arrests? An explanation of arrest data on the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program states that the report counts one arrest for each separate instance in which a person is arrested, cited or summoned for an offense. Because a person can be arrested multiple times, the FBI report doesn’t reflect the number of people who have been arrested, but the number of times people are arrested. So what’s the skinny? Marijuana legalization advocate James Bell said about 100 Georgians are arrested each day on charges of marijuana possession. Bell’s claim is based on FBI crime report arrest data. Using that data from the years 2008 through 2010, an average of about 28,000 possession arrests were recorded in Georgia each year. Dividing the average annual possession arrests by 365 days results in about 76.7 marijuana possession arrests each day. Bell uses that arrest data to estimate the number of people arrested for the violation. But the FBI clearly states this type of estimation that Bell claims is not reflected in their numbers. Individuals can be arrested multiple times for the same infraction, so the FBI’s arrest data indicate the number of arrests -- not the number of people arrested -- for any particular infraction. Based on this explanation, Bell’s claim seems to be up in smoke. We rated Bell’s claim .


Routine "recess" a hit at White House obesity summit.

Explanation: A doctor’s endorsement of frequent recess breaks — and not just for kids — drew an appreciative response from experts meeting at a White House summit on childhood obesity on Friday.

Dozens of child advocates, public policy experts and doctors gathered to brainstorm ideas for first lady Michelle Obama’s campaign to wipe out childhood obesity in a generation. An interagency task force reviewing U.S. programs and policies on child nutrition and physical activity is due to report to President Barack Obama within the next month. The summit participants were asked to come up with three to five recommendations for the task force to consider taking to the president. Healthier foods in corporate cafeterias and linking public transportation to grocery store access were among the early suggestions. But the audience especially appeared to appreciate a California doctor’s call for a drive to integrate short bursts of physical activity into the regular workplace and school routine. “We have great meetings with lots of healthy refreshments now, compared to 20 years ago when we would only have unhealthy refreshments, or 30 years ago when people would have been smoking in this room,” said Dr. Toni Yancey of University of California Los Angeles. “Now we need to not coop people up for hours on end without physical activity,” Yancey continued as laughter erupted from colleagues in the windowless auditorium. The experts’ advice and guidance would help the task force develop measurable benchmarks for fighting childhood obesity, Michelle Obama said at the start of the session. The United States spends $150 billion a year to treat obesity-related conditions. The costs are projected to almost double over the next decade and will account for a fifth of overall healthcare spending, White House budget director Peter Orszag said. Besides direct healthcare costs and lost productivity, Orszag said the magnitude of obesity-associated health risk may not be fully appreciated. “Having a body mass index in the obesity range is equivalent to aging 20 years in terms of the chronic conditions that you face,” Orszag said. “So, 40 may be the new 30, but if you’re obese, unfortunately, 40’s the new 60.”


US-Patent 8835624 is for the H1N1 virus. The patent with this number was for a strand of DNA that binds to the H1N1 virus, not the virus itself. US patent number 20120251502 is for Ebola. This application number was for a strain of the Ebola virus but the application has now been abandoned. The virus was not created by those who filed the patent. US patent number CA2741523 is for swine flu. This is the application number for a patent for the Ebola virus made to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. This patent has not been granted, and doesn’t mean the Ebola virus was created by someone. 0070031450 A1 is a US patent for BSE (mad cow disease). There is a patent application number one digit away from this that mentions BSE, but is not a patent for BSE itself. ATTC VR-84 is a patent for Zika virus that comes from the Rockefeller Foundation. This is the name of a certain strain of Zika virus, which was first isolated in the 1940s in a lab funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. This strain was not patented. US patents 7897744 and 8506968 are for SARS. The first number is the US patent number for the SARS virus. The patent application was made by the CDC, but after the outbreak in 2002. The second number is a patent for a SARS vaccine which has now expired. US patent 10130701 is for coronavirus. This number is not a patent for the new Wuhan virus, Covid-19. It’s a patent for a weakened version of a virus in the same family as Covid-19, a family which includes the common cold and SARS. Claim 1 of 8


Planned Parenthood is not involved in women’s health issues, said Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush. At a town hall in Englewood, Colo., Aug. 25, an audience member asked Bush about his record on women’s health, as well as what he would do for women’s health, particularly for veterans, as president. "When I was governor, we expanded those programs through community-based organizations, and that’s something I think the federal government needs to continue to do," Bush said. "I, for one, don’t think Planned Parenthood ought to get a penny, though. And that’s the difference because they’re not actually doing women’s health issues. They're involved in something way different than that." Bush, who cut off state funding for Planned Parenthood as governor, then pivoted to talk about veterans affairs. Bush’s claim that the organization is not involved in women’s health caught our attention. Setting aside the issue of abortion, Planned Parenthood offers many other medical services -- most of which seem obviously related to women’s health. We reached out to Bush’s campaign, and it directed us to a tweet that Bush posted, after Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton criticized his Aug. 25 remarks. Bush’s tweet said, "PP (Planned Parenthood) treatment of unborn has been horrifying. Let's support quality women's health programs instead." The National Library of Medicine defines "women’s health" as "the branch of medicine that focuses on the treatment and diagnosis of diseases and conditions that affect a woman's physical and emotional well-being." While "women’s health" encompasses all health issues as they pertain to women, reproductive health in particular is Planned Parenthood’s primary focus. The organization offers contraception, sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment, pregnancy testing, prenatal services and cancer screenings, including breast exams. (No, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms, but it conducts breast exams and refers women to other clinics for mammograms.) In total, Planned Parenthood saw 2.7 million individual patients in 2013, and it provided nearly 11 million services, according to its most recent annual report. About 12 percent of patients received an abortion, (assuming one procedure per abortion patient), so the remaining 88 percent of patients received other health services. Here’s the section of the report breaking down services provided in 2013:  Our friends at the Washington Post's Fact Checker also looked at Bush's claim and gave it four pinocchios, their lowest rating. Our ruling Bush said, Planned Parenthood is "not actually doing women’s health issues." It’s hard to reconcile Bush’s statement with the fact that -- setting abortion procedures aside -- Planned Parenthood offered more than 10 million services in 2013. Those services included contraception, breast exams, pregnancy tests, pap tests and STI testing and treatment. Bush is opposed to abortion, but it doesn’t make sense to say that Planned Parenthood isn’t addressing women’s health issues. We rate Bush’s claim .


We've caught Iran cheating on the interim (nuclear) deal.

Foreign Policy, Nuclear, PunditFact, Stephen Hayes,

As the pundits look ahead to 2015, they know that time is running out for the United States to reach a permanent deal with Iran over its nuclear program. The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States — along with Germany, have until mid March to come to terms on a deal with the Islamic republic. If all goes the way the United States hopes, a signed agreement will keep Iran out of the nuclear weapons club. For now, the two sides are operating under an interim agreement, which rolls back Iran’s stock of enriched uranium and freezes the country’s capability to produce nuclear materials that could be used to make a nuclear bomb. In exchange, Iran can sell its oil more freely and gain access to millions of dollars in frozen assets. On Fox News Sunday Dec. 28, 2014, Stephen Hayes of the conservative Weekly Standard magazine spoke skeptically about what lies ahead. Hayes believes a final deal is likely, but he doubts the Obama administration will drive a hard bargain. "They want the deal for the sake of having the deal," Hayes said. "We basically caught -- we've caught Iran cheating on the interim deal and rather than saying, ‘Look, we're done, you've proven that you're not an effective partner, that we can't trust you,’ they say, ‘We'll give you more time because we're going to get to a deal.’ " We decided to check whether Iran was caught cheating on the interim agreement. Hayes told us he had two violations in mind. The one most tightly tied to Iran’s nuclear program had to do with Iran’s work with a new model of centrifuge. Centrifuges are key to enriching uranium and enriched uranium is key to making a bomb. The other violation had to do with Iran selling more oil than it is allowed. In our research, we found a third possible violation involving Iran buying parts for its heavy water reactor in Arak. What we discovered is that while Iran isn’t squeaky clean, no point is definitively in violation of the interim agreement. Importantly, the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported no violations with the Joint Plan of Action. We’ll deal with each potential violation in turn. Work with a new model of centrifuge One of the pillars of the interim agreement, the Joint Plan of Action, was to freeze Iran’s centrifuge facilities. It could keep the tens of thousands of centrifuges it has and could repair any that were broken, but it couldn’t expand its capacity. As part of the agreement, Iran could continue some limited research and development work. A problem emerged in November when the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that in the "R&D area," Iran "has been intermittently feeding natural UF6 (uranium fluoride) into the IR-5 centrifuge." Agency inspectors said that no enriched uranium emerged because the Iranians recombined everything back together at the end of the run. This set off red flags because, until then, the Iranians had not fed uranium fluoride into that particular centrifuge. "Iran was caught red-handed engaged in centrifuge activities," Hayes said. "When confronted by the State Department, Iran stopped feeding the IR-5." Hayes relied on an assessment from the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington-based group that aims to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. In November, the institute initially said, "The feeding of the IR-5 centrifuge is an apparent violation of that commitment to freeze centrifuge R&D activities." Hayes told us that he took an "apparent violation" to be the equivalent of cheating. But David Albright, the institute’s president, said that after a closer look, it wasn’t that cut and dried. "It’s hard to say definitively one way or the other on the question of a clear violation," Albright told PunditFact. Albright and his group’s latest assessment is that the Joint Plan of Action didn’t specifically allow the Iranians to feed the uranium into the IR-5 centrifuge. But it’s not clear if that constitutes a violation. Albright said that an administration official told him that the action was "inconsistent with the United States’ understanding of the Joint Plan of Action." That could be a diplomatic way of saying there had been a violation, or it might mean that the original agreement was unclear, a lawyer told Albright. What is clear: The Americans asked Iran to stop, and Iran did. Adam Mount, a nuclear security fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said as far as anyone can tell, the interim agreement has achieved what it set out to do. "There is no publicly available evidence that Iran has violated the terms of the Joint Plan of Action," Mount said. "Progress on the Iranian nuclear program is frozen and in some of the most important areas, it has been rolled back." Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, a group that hopes to see a final nuclear agreement with Iran, said it would have been better if Iran hadn’t fed the uranium into the IR-5 centrifuge. "Was it useful or helpful?" Kimball asked. "No. Was it specifically prohibited by the Joint Plan of Action? Also no. There is a big difference between the Iranians have been caught cheating, and a dispute about the one centrifuge." In sum, the weight of the evidence says that it would have been better if Iran had not fired up that IR-5 centrifuge, but doing so didn’t rise to the level of violating the interim agreement. Iran sold too much oil Hayes’ second contention is that Iran sold more oil than allowed as part of the interim agreement. "Iran violated the terms of the Joint Plan of Action by exporting more crude than the agreement allowed, specifically to China, India, Japan and South Korea," Hayes told us. For evidence, Hayes pointed us to a Reuters article that reported that in the first nine months of 2014, sales to those countries had risen nearly 20 percent from the year before, to about 1.14 million barrels per day. But again, things aren’t so cut and dried. The Joint Plan of Action says that the five Security Council countries and Germany would stop trying to reduce the amount of oil that Iran could sell. It also says that countries can continue to buy "their current average amounts of crude oil." There are no specific caps, however, and no clear explanation of what would constitute a violation. We spoke to Mark Dubowitz, who is executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a group that monitors enforcement of sanctions against Iran. Dubowitz said he believes both Iran and the countries that bought its oil skirted the deal. But ultimately, Dubowitz said we can’t know for sure whether Iran’s oil sales violate the terms of the agreement because we lack access to a critical piece. Behind the public summary of the Joint Plan of Action is a much more detailed implementation agreement. Only people with a certain level of security clearance can see it. "We don’t know what that says," Dubowitz said. "Iran’s sales might be a violation. Or they might not." Also, several of the countries that are buying Iran’s oil, such as India, Japan and South Korea, didn’t sign the interim agreement and thus wouldn’t be bound by it. And lastly, while the United States has set limits on the amount of oil Iran can sell, those are not written into the Joint Plan of Action. Buying parts for a heavy water reactor Some analysts we reached thought Hayes might have been thinking of another potential problem with Iran. According to some reports, it has continued to buy parts that could be used in its heavy water reactor, which is another means to produce fuel for a nuclear bomb. However, even if those reports are accurate, the activity falls outside the interim agreement. Matthew Kroenig is a professor of international relations at Georgetown University. Kroenig would not call these purchases a violation of the Joint Plan of Action. On the other hand, Kroenig said that shouldn’t make anyone feel any better. "It is in violation of U.N. sanctions prohibiting Iranian procurement of sensitive nuclear technology," Kroenig said. "It also might reveal something about how sincere Iran is about shutting down or converting the reactor as part of a final deal." Our ruling Hayes said Iran had been caught cheating on the interim deal to rein in Iran’s nuclear program, called the Joint Plan of Action. First, the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported no violations with the Joint Plan of Action. That said, there are some actions by Iran that certainly cut near the boundaries of the terms of the agreement. Iran has worked with a new kind of centrifuge that, while perhaps not a formal violation, does seem to contradict the United States’ understanding of the deal, an expert told us. When confronted on the matter, Iran stopped its work. Also, there is some question about the amount of oil Iran is exporting. But an expert said we just don’t have enough information to determine whether that constitutes a violation of the agreement or not. Hayes said we caught Iran cheating. You can say some allege that, and you can say there’s some evidence that might suggest that. But we found no hand in the cookie jar. Consider helping fund PolitiFact's Kickstarter to live fact-check the 2015 State of the Union and GOP response.


The Claim: Aspirin Can Reduce the Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease

Explanation: This story – about whether aspirin can prevent Alzheimer’s disease – only ran about 210 words. It could have used more space to clear up the confusion it causes in reviewing the evidence. The results of the most recent research on the topic, though conducted as a randomized clincial trial, were disregarded in favor of the more appealing result – i.e. that a common, readily available product can be used to reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s disease. It would have been far more useful to explain about why there may be discrepancies between research studies, how a reader might go about assessing the information, and, when there are differences in outcomes,  how one can make a decision about the options. The story stated that “people who took a low dose of aspirin every day for several years reduced their risk of developing Alzheimer’s by 13 percent.”  However the study itself reported that use of low-dose aspirin did not result in a significant reduction in Alzheimer’s disease. Thus the story did not accurately report on these results and compounded this with its concluding statement. The story only listed stomach bleeding and ulcers as side effects of aspirin. The story also failed to include information about often it occurs. However as this is a story about prevention of Alzheimer’s disease, it should have mentioned that the bleeding risks associated with aspirin use increase with age. No experts were quoted; some expert help was needed on this story.

There was no information about the cost of treatment, though, again, knowledge about this product, including its cost, is widespread. The story stated that “people who took a low dose of aspirin every day for several years reduced their risk of developing Alzheimer’s by 13 percent.”  However the study itself reported that use of low-dose aspirin did not result in a significant reduction in Alzheimer’s disease. Thus the story did not accurately report on these results and compounded this with its concluding statement. The story only listed stomach bleeding and ulcers as side effects of aspirin. The story also failed to include information about often it occurs. However as this is a story about prevention of Alzheimer’s disease, it should have mentioned that the bleeding risks associated with aspirin use increase with age. The evidence presented in this story was confusing. Although the most recent research was a randomized clincial trial, the writer chose to disregard these results in favor of epidemiologic study which found that HIGH doses of aspirin were associated with a statistically lower prevelance of Alzheimer’s disease. This study found no significant association with low dose aspirin; further, the conclusion reads as follows:  “Aspirin might protect against Alzheimer’s disease, but controlled trials are warranted.”  So it is presumptuous for the journalist to conclude “Regular aspirin use may lower the risk of Alzheimer’s.” There was no overt disease mongering in this story. This story did not appear to contain material obtained from individuals with expertise in this area. No one was quoted. There was no discussion of any other approaches under investigation for prevention or delay of Alzheimer’s disease. Although the story did not explicitly state that low-dose aspirin is a readily available, over-the-counter product, this information is common knowledge. The story accurately explained that studies examining whether aspirin can reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s disease have been conducted over a period of time. This story appears to have drawn on the results from different research studies and does not appear to rely exclusively on a press release.


North Korea to launch medical tourism, targeting visitors from China.

Explanation: North Korea, one of the world’s most reclusive states, plans to branch out into medical tourism next year, offering foreign visitors, most likely from China, treatments including cataract surgery, dental implants and therapy for tumors.

The ruling party’s Rodong Sinmun newspaper reported on Friday the recent launch of the “Treatment Tourism Exchange Corporation”, aimed at capitalizing on the “rising demand for tourism, including medical care, in line with an international trend”. The new state entity will operate health clinics near hot springs, whose mineral waters, it said, can help treat neuralgia, arthritis, and heart and skin ailments. Private tourism is one of the few remaining areas of business not blocked by sanctions imposed on North Korea over its nuclear and missile programs. As many as 350,000 Chinese tourists have visited North Korea this year, potentially netting the authorities up to $175 million, according to some analysts. Last month, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visited a hot spring resort nearing completion in the central alpine town of Yangdok, one of major construction projects at the heart of his drive to build a “self-reliant” economy. Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean studies in Seoul, described the medical tourism campaign as propaganda designed at showing progress, while adding that it could appeal to some Chinese tourists. “North Korea primarily offers natural tourist attractions and appears to believe they can be a money maker if combined with elements of oriental medicine, which many Chinese people like,” he said. A recent report by a government-affiliated health institute in neighboring South Korea said North Korea was struggling to provide basic health care. “The reality is that primary-care providers — local clinics and doctors — are so short of basic equipment and supplies that they barely provide what may be called medical consultation,” it concluded in the report on the state of the health sector in the North. “The situation is not much better for secondary-care providers including state hospitals in cities and counties,” it said.