Biden's Top 10 Falsehoods on Abortion

 On the 50^th anniversary of Roe v Wade, President Biden issued a proclamation parroting the abortion lobby’s disinformation surrounding the Dobbs case.

Let’s examine the Top Ten Falsehoods:

First: Thousands of women will die without access to abortion.

Earning “Four Pinocchios” from the Washington Post fact-checker, this claim is as false today as when it was manufactured pre-Roe. It is based on flimsy data from the early 1900’s, predating antibiotics and modern contraception.

Every pro-life law ever enacted contains a life-of-the-mother exception. Pro-lifers treasure the lives of both mother and child, and pro-life laws provide exceptions for medical emergencies.

Finally, if anyone is endangering women’s lives, it is the abortion industry with its relentless push for largely unregulated mail-order abortion pills for women and girls to take at home by themselves. 

Two: Women will die from ectopic pregnancy.

This is the same as Lie Number One – and equally false.

Ectopic pregnancies are textbook examples of what life-of-the-mother provisions in pro-life laws contemplate. However tragic, they are nonetheless navigated by parents and physicians every day. Care necessary to save mothers’ lives is morally uncontroversial – and no pro-life legislation will change that.

Three: Pro-life laws will endanger women suffering miscarriages.

Doctors know the difference between miscarriage and abortion. This is deliberate misinformation.

Laws against abortion do not affect miscarriage management, just as laws against euthanasia do not preclude end-of-life hospice care. Laws against homicide do not preclude organ-donation. Any potential ambiguity about this is due to the abortion lobby’s irresponsible spreading of doubt and deception.

Four: Women will be thrown in jail.

Completely false. The pro-life movement has always viewed women as the second victims of abortion. Pro-life legislation has always protected both victims from the violence of abortion. Penalties in pro-life laws apply to abortionists, not women.

Five: After Dobbs, states will ban contraception and IVF.

This is the political lie of the hour. The abortion industry knows its preferred policy of unrestricted abortion until birth is extremely unpopular. So, post-Dobbs, they are desperately trying to hide behind more popular causes.

But the Supreme Court’s Dobbs majority anticipated this tactic and specifically stated that the ruling only applies to abortion, not contraception, not same-sex marriage, not anything else, because, their opinion said, abortion is different in that it destroys an unborn human being. 

Neither Congress nor any state is considering such bans.

Six: We don’t really know when life begins.

This is silly. We know exactly when human life begins. Biology textbooks are clear: a new human life begins at the moment of sperm-egg fusion. The distinct, biological identity of an unborn human from the moment of conception is as settled a scientific fact as gravity.

Preborn humans are incontrovertibly alive, but dependent – just as all of us are at some time in our lives – needing the love and care of others.

Seven: “Heartbeat laws” are deceptive – there is no heartbeat in early pregnancy.

This is where otherwise intelligent, educated people pretend not to understand modern technology.

Since the rise of the Texas Heartbeat Law, the abortion lobby and the media have tried to attack the “heartbeat” law without using the word “heartbeat.” We have witnessed a series of progressively sillier euphemisms – “electrical pulsing,” “fluttering,” “jumble of cells.”

Calling the law a “six-week ban” only reminds people that babies have discernible heartbeats at six weeks. In fact, at six weeks, the embryonic heart is beating about 100 times per minute. 

Every pregnant mother in the last 30 years has heard her baby’s heartbeat. Pretending otherwise denies science, technology, and the lived experience of tens of millions of women.

Eight: Restricting abortion discriminates against women on the basis of sex.

This argument is superficially compelling until you realize it assumes that the male body is normative and, therefore, the female body and femininity itself are abnormalities or disabilities. It wrongly equates male-specific medical procedures like treatment for prostate cancer with female-specific abortion procedures, as if removing cancer is the same as removing an unborn child.

Nine: Pro-lifers don’t care about the mother or baby after birth.

This is projection. The same Texas legislature that passed the Heartbeat Law appropriated $100 million in assistance for mothers and babies. 

Thanks to the pro-life movement, any woman in need can find help at 2,700 pregnancy centers and maternity homes by going to OptionLine.org, CareNet.org, LoveLine.com, StandingWithYou.org, or Aid and Support After Pregnancy. 

Any woman suffering after an abortion can go to HopeAfterAbortion.com, HurtAfterAbortion.com, PostAbortionHelp.org, or Sisters of Life Post-Abortion healing retreats.

This charge is a lie and a slander. Pro-lifers offer pregnant mothers hope and care; abortion advocates offer violence and despair. 

Ten: Women need abortion to be equal members of society.

It’s the reliance argument: without abortion, women cannot obtain educational success, achieve career goals, climb out of poverty, or build a successful family in the future.

This is empirically and plainly false. A Dobbs brief written by 240 women scholars provides mountains of evidence that women’s social and economic advancement over the past decades has not been dependent upon abortion access. The data show the expansion of women’s opportunities is attributable to changes in the education, equal pay, equal employment and civil rights laws, not the ability to abort. 

We all know women who have overcome crisis pregnancies. Stories of hope abound. Sonya Curry writes movingly that she was in college, unmarried, pregnant and scared. She scheduled an abortion, but bravely cancelled at the last minute. That baby grew up to be Steph Curry, the NBA’s greatest shooter, who was at the White House last week celebrating his team’s championship.

Fortunately, the truths of science, the beauty of ultrasound images, the care of pregnancy resource centers, and the strength and resilience of women are counterweights to these falsehoods. 

Maureen Ferguson is a Senior Fellow for The Catholic Association.

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2023/01/26/top_10_falsehoods_of_biden_administration_on_abortion_877942.html

Busted Pfizer Exec Claims Lied About "Mutating COVID" To "Impress Date Like Normal People"

 Update (1750ET): Project Veritas' James O'Keefe was physically assaulted after approaching Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer's Director of R&D, Strategic Operations, who had been caught on tape admitting to the fact that the company is exploring a way to "mutate" COVID via "Directed Evolution" in order to anticipate new strains for their Covid-19 vaccine.

When O'Keefe first approached him about his admission, Walker erupted in denial, exclaiming that "I was just lying to a person to impress them on a date." He then lunged for O'Keefe and his staff in what appeared to be an effort to take away the iPad that O'Keefe was holding.

The situation escalated when Walker urged the restaurant owner to call the police, but the restaurant owner asked O'Keefe to leave... which left Walker pressuring him to stay until the police arrived.

As Walker raged around the empty restaurant, he once again claimed: "I was on a third date with a man and like normal people you lie to impress a date..."

Yeah, we are not sure lying about mutating the COVID virus in order that the company you work for can make more money will get you to 3rd base (let alone first base).

Walker went on to admit that "I'm not even a scientist by background..."

When speaking to the NYPD, Walker said "there are... five white people... and I am feeling very unsafe right now."

Then Walker, more emotionally, asked O'Keefe why he is doing this, with the alleged Pfizer exec saying: “I’m just someone who’s working in a company that’s trying to literally help the public.”

Once O'Keefe had left the restaurant, Walker jumped in front of their car to block it until the police arrived (however, it was not the right car)...

Watch the full interaction here: 

O'Keefe also draws attention to the fact that it appears Google has gone into full suppression mode on this story...

Jack Posobiec summed the entire interaction up perfectly: "This is what happens when a narcissist knows he's funked and there is no way out."

*  *  *

A high-level Pfizer employee was caught on undercover camera by Project Veritas when he inadvertently dropped several bombshells which we're confident will be subject to extreme damage control over the coming weeks.

Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer's Director of R&D, Strategic Operations - and an mRNA Scientific Planner, said that the company is exploring a way to "mutate" COVID via "Directed Evolution" in order to anticipate new strains for their Covid-19 vaccine.

"One of the things we [Pfizer] are exploring is like, why don't we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create -- preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we're gonna do that though, there's a risk of like, as you could imagine -- no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses," said Walker, adding that he believes Pfizer scientists are going about it slowly "because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations."

(Entire interview below)

Walker claims that "directed evolution" is different from Gain-of-Function research.

"Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them," he said, before saying calling the Covid-19 natural origins theory bullshit:

"You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t."

"You’re not supposed to do Gain-of-Function research with viruses. Regularly not. We can do these selected structure mutations to make them more potent. There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ," he continued.

Walker also admitted that Covid-19 mutations were going to be "a cash cow" for Pfizer.

Walker:Part of what they [Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up. So, it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.

Veritas Journalist:Oh my God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control nature before nature even happens itself? Right?

Walker:Yeah. If it works.

Veritas Journalist:What do you mean if it works?

Walker:Because some of the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for. Like with Delta and Omicron. And things like that. Who knows? Either way, it’s going to be a cash cow. COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going forward. Like obviously.

Veritas Journalist:Well, I think the whole research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the ultimate cash cow.

Walker:Yeah, it’d be perfect.

He also explained that Big Pharma and government agencies such as the FDA are not working in the best interests of Americans.

Walker:[Big Pharma] is a revolving door for all government officials.

Veritas Journalist:Wow.

Walker:In any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the people who review our drugs -- eventually most of them will come work for pharma companies. And in the military, defense government officials eventually work for defense companies afterwards.

…

Veritas Journalist:How do you feel about that revolving door?

Walker:It’s pretty good for the industry to be honest. It’s bad for everybody else in America.

Veritas Journalist:Why is it bad for everybody else?

Walker:Because when the regulators reviewing our drugs know that once they stop regulating, they are going to work for the company, they are not going to be as hard towards the company that’s going to give them a job.

Watch the entire video below: 

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/directed-evolution-pfizer-rd-exec-says-covid-19-created-wuhan-cash-cow-company

Sudden Cardiac Arrest Risk During Sports Low in Older Adults

 The benefits of regular exercise likely outweigh the low risk of sports-related sudden cardiac arrest among community-dwelling US adults ages 65 and older, a new study suggests.

The analysis of sudden cardiac arrest events among close to 2 million older adults in Portland, Oregon and Ventura County, California, showed sport-related events were rare in this population, comprising only 1.9% of all sudden cardiac arrests among those age 65 years and older, with the vast majority (91%) occurring in men.

Furthermore, compared with those who experienced sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) events not related to sports, individuals with sports-related sudden cardiac arrest (SrSCA) had a significantly lower burden of cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, or hyperlipidemia.

"As a cardiologist who is a (slow and steady) endurance runner, I am a firm believer in the benefits of exercise," Sumeet S. Chugh, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Health System in Los Angeles, told theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology. "However, I was still surprised by the extremely low annual incidence of SrSCA in the two communities."

"It is likely that the benefits of sports activity in the older adult far exceed the risk," he said. "The small proportion that do suffer SrSCA are likely to have significant coronary artery disease that went undetected, or there was an unexpected clinical event."

The study was published online January 18 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology: Clinical Electrophysiology.

Fewer Risks or Comorbidities

The researchers investigated all out-of-hospital SCAs with resuscitation attempts in the Portland metro area (2002-2017) and in Ventura County (2015-2021) among 1.85 million participants in two large prospective trials. Those with SCA during or within 1 hour of cessation of sports activity were considered SrSCA.

Sports activity was defined as any physical activity conducted with the goal of recreation or maintenance of physical fitness or skill. "Gym activity" encompassed every activity an older adult might engage in in the gym, Chugh noted.

Among 4078 SCAs, 77 were SrSCAs (1.9%; 91% men). Based on conservative estimates of community residents age 65 and older who participate in sports activity, the SrSCA incidence was 28.9 per 100,000 sport participation years in Portland and 18.4 per 100,000 in Ventura.

The majority (77%) of SrSCAs occurred during sports activity (most commonly running, cycling, and gym activity); 17% occurred within 1 hour after cessation; and 6% could not be classified in either category.

Twenty individuals with SrSCA (26%) had warning symptoms — most commonly, chest pain (55%) — in the 24 hours preceding the event. Three (15%) had seizures and the remainder had nonspecific symptoms such as dizziness or nausea.

Among those with available medical records (47 SrSCA and 3162 non-SrSCA), individuals with SrSCA had a lower prevalence of clinical comorbidities compared with non-SrSCA cases, including heart failure (17% vs 38%), COPD/asthma (15.6% vs 35.8%), and hypertension (57.8% vs 80.1%). They also had had a significantly lower burden of cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, smoking, or obesity.

However, the prevalence of previously diagnosed coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction were the same between the groups (48.9% vs 48.1% and 27.7% vs 25.4%, respectively).

In addition, SrSCA was associated with public location as well as higher rates of bystander-witnessed and shockable rhythms. This resulted in survival outcomes that were fourfold higher than non-SrSCA.

"Sports activity in the older adult should be encouraged and these findings provide data that can be given to the patient so they can balance risk and benefit," Chugh said.

"When providing an exercise/sports prescription it is important to follow clinical guidelines," he added.

For older adults who are not accustomed to exercising, the researchers recommend a gradual increase in exercise over 6-8 weeks. An earlier review by Chugh and Joseph B. Weiss, MD, provides a schematic and details on increasing sports participation among older adults.

Hot Topic

Commenting on the study for theheart.org | Medscape Cardiology, Nikhil Warrier, MD, medical director of electrophysiology at MemorialCare Heart & Vascular Institute at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, California, said that after pro football player Damar Hamlin's SCA on national TV earlier this month, "this has been a hot topic of discussion in a lot of my recent patient encounters. As a practice, we have a fair amount of patients that fit [the study] profile, with an overall healthier lifestyle and very low cardiovascular comorbidities. As a result, this study will have a significant impact in addressing this topic with them."

"The limitations of the study are well described and are mostly related to data gathering since this was not a randomized trial," noted Warrier, who was not associated with the study. "Additional research looking into which patients would benefit from preparticipation exercise screening would be ideal in an attempt to risk stratify these asymptomatic patients."

Clinical assessment of any symptoms occurring during physical activity could also play an important role in assessing individual risk, he added. Meanwhile, like Chugh and colleagues, Warrier said "the overall benefits of sports activity likely outweigh the low risk of SrSCA in this patient population."

No commercial funding or relevant financial relationships were reported.

J Am Coll Cardiol EP.  Published online January 18, 2023. Abstract

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/987568

Kids With Autism But No Intellectual Disability May Fall Through the Cracks

 Approximately two out of three children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) do not have concurrent intellectual disability, according to a population study of ASD trends.

Dr Josephine Shenouda

Intellectual functioning remains the best predictor of functional outcomes in kids with ASD, and missing those with no cognitive impairment (ASD-N) can prevent intervention and affect future achievement.

Furthermore, while the study found that ASD-N increased among all demographic subgroups from 2000 to 2016, it also observed widespread health disparities in identifying ASD-N, especially in Black, Hispanic, and underprivileged children.

"ASD is a major public health concern and prevalence estimates are likely to continue to rise as disparities are reduced and ASD identification is improved," wrote researchers led by Josephine Shenouda, DrPH, MS, of Rutgers School of Public Health in Piscataway, New Jersey, in Pediatrics.

The study period saw a surprising 500% increase in the prevalence of ASD-N and a 200% increase in the prevalence of cognitive impairment–associated ASD-I , with higher rates across all sex, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic subgroups. The five- and twofold respective increases are consistent with previous research.

"To a large degree, the rise in autism estimates has been driven by individuals without intellectual disability," Shenouda said in an interview. "The best way to address increasing autism and to affect disparities in autism identification is through universal autism screening during the toddler period. And different metrics of functional outcomes need to be developed to understand the expression of autism better."

Her group had previously seen autism estimates of approximately 1% in 2000 rise to 3% by 2016 but had noted variations, with some communities exceeding 5% for autism estimates. "That led to the question of why, and we saw that in areas with high estimates, we are identifying more children with autism without intellectual disability," she said. "We wanted to know if the increase over time was equally distributed among children with autism with and without intellectual disability."

A Study in Disparities

The cross-sectional study examined data from active ASD surveillance by the CDC's Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network in 8-year-olds residing in the New York/New Jersey Metropolitan Area. Overall, 4661 children were identified with ASD, with ASD-I affecting 1505 (32.3%), and ASD-N affecting 2764 (59.3%). Non-Hispanic Black children who were affected numbered 946 (20.3%), while 1230 (26.4%) were Hispanic, and 2114 (45.4%) were non-Hispanic white.

Notably, Black children were 30% less likely to be identified with ASD-N compared with white children, and children residing in affluent areas were 80% more likely to be identified with ASD-N versus those in underserved areas. Furthermore, a greater proportion of children with ASD-I resided in vulnerable areas compared with their counterparts with ASD-N.

While males had a higher prevalence compared with females regardless of intellectual disability status, male-to-female ratios were slightly lower among ASD-I compared with ASD-N cases.

Dr Barbara J. Howard

Commenting on the study but not involved in it, Barbara J. Howard, MD, an assistant professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, said the increasing gap in identifying ASD-N according to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status measures probably reflects greater parental awareness of ASD and access to diagnostic services in white families and those of higher socioeconomic status. "There were no racial, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status differences in the prevalence of the more obvious and impairing ASD-I in the sample, but its prevalence was also increasing over this period," she said.

Although the greater recognition of the less impairing ASD-N is important for optimal outcomes through intervention, the increasing discrepancies mean that more children generally and more marginalized children specifically are not being diagnosed or served. "There should be no differences in prevalence by these characteristics," Howard said. "The striking inequity for non-white children and those of lower socioeconomic status in being diagnosed with ASD-N and thus qualifying for intervention that could improve their long-term functioning is likely also compounded by service, educational, and social disadvantages they may experience."

Dr Emily Hotez

In light of these disparities, an accompanying editorial by Emily Hotez, PhD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and Lindsay Shea, DrPH, of the A.J. Drexel Autism Institute at Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, argues that social determinants of health (SDOH) should be prioritized in the public health surveillance of autism since these factors potentially contribute to the general underdiagnosis of autism in minority groups and merit more attention from pediatricians. While SDOH affects many nonautistic conditions, it may be even more important for families dealing with the stressors and isolation associated with autism, the commentators said. "Our commentary speaks to the utility of increasing SDOH surveillance in improving our understanding of autistic individuals' needs, experiences, and priorities on a population level," Hotez said in an interview. She added that integrating SDOH surveillance into pediatricians' workflows will lead to improvements in clinical practice and patient care in the long term.

"Specifically, increased uptake of universal SDOH screening and referral practices will allow pediatricians to more proactively link autistic children and families, particularly those from marginalized groups, with much-needed health-promoting services and supports." She cautioned, however, that while most providers believe universal SDOH screening is important, fewer report that screening is feasible or feel prepared to address families' social needs when they are identified.

This study was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The authors had no conflicts of interest to disclose. The commentators had no potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Howard disclosed no competing interests relevant to her comments.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/987567

Rand Paul, GOP Senators Push Bill To Reinstate Service Members Fired For Refusing COVID Vax

 by Steve Watson via Summit News,

GOP Senator Rand Paul has joined others in promoting an updated bill to reinstate military service members who were previously fired for refusing to comply with the Biden Administration’s COVID vaccine mandate.

The legislation, named the Allowing Military Exemptions, Recognizing Individual Concerns About New Shots (AMERICANS) Act of 2023, includes a requirement that the Secretary of Defense offer reinstatement to active members who were removed from duty for not taking the shots.

Senator Paul noted “The COVID-19 vaccine mandate has ruined the livelihoods of men and women who have honorably served our country. This inept bureaucratic policy should have never been imposed, and while it has since been rolled back, we still have service members who have not been rehired, promoted, or received back pay and benefits.”

He continued, “The AMERICANS Act will address these issues and others that the Biden administration has failed to consider at the expense of service members’ lives and our nation’s national security interests.”

Senator Ted Cruz, who is also co-sponsoring the bill added “Our military continues to feel the effects of the Biden administration’s reckless, misguided, and now-prohibited vaccine mandates.”

“I’m glad that we were able to remove the COVID-19 vaccine mandate last Congress, but there is more work to do,” Cruz urged, adding “The AMERICANS Act would correct the wrongs done to unvaccinated service members who were discharged for exercising their conscience.”

As they noted in their statements, the Senators were previously successful in getting the mandate scrapped by threatening to block the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act.

Representative Dan Bishop, who has introduced a companion bill in the House, also noted that “While last year’s NDAA directed that SECDEF rescind the DOD’s authoritarian COVID vaccine mandate, it didn’t prohibit the DOD from issuing a similar mandate in the future.”

He continued, “The bill also didn’t provide any meaningful remedies for service members who were kicked out due to the mandate. This is completely unacceptable. Sen. Cruz and my bill, the AMERICANS Act, will close these glaring loopholes and bring justice to military members who were purged by Secretary Austin’s egregious vaccine mandate.”

Specifically, the legislation will require the Department of Defense to:

• Reinstate any service member separated solely for COVID-19 vaccine status who wants to return to service, crediting the service member with the time of involuntary separation for retirement pay calculations;

• Restore the rank of any service member demoted solely for COVID-19 vaccine status, compensating the service member for any pay and benefits lost due to that demotion;

• Adjust to “honorable” any “general” discharge given to a service member solely due to COVID-19 vaccine status;

• Expunge from a service members’ record any adverse action based solely on COVID-19 vaccine status, regardless of whether the service member previously sought an accommodation;

• Make every effort to retain service members not vaccinated against COVID-19, providing them with professional development, promotion, and leadership opportunities equal to that of their peers; and

• Provide a COVID-19 vaccine exemption process for service members with natural immunity, a relevant underlying health condition, or a sincerely held religious belief inconsistent with being vaccinated.

The Military Times estimates that more than 3,400 troops were “involuntarily separated from the service” due to non-compliance with the vaccine mandate.

Despite Republican attempts to stop mandatory vaccines for active duty personnel, and to uphold exemption rights, the Biden administration has continually pushed for dishonourable discharges and even court martialing for troops who disobey orders to get the shots.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/rand-paul-gop-senators-push-bill-reinstate-service-members-fired-refusing-covid-vaccines

Judge Blocks California’s COVID-19 Misinformation Law

 by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A California judge on Wednesday halted the state’s so-called COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation law, which was challenged by doctors in two lawsuits, claiming it violates their constitutional rights.

In Hoeg v. Newsom, five doctors alleged that the state law, AB 2098, is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. A separate related lawsuit, Hoang v. Bonta, makes similar allegations.

Both lawsuits sought a preliminary injunction to prevent California from enforcing the law.

The five doctors, Tracy Hoeg, Ram Duriseti, Aaron Kheriaty, Pete Mazolewski, and Azadeh Khatibi, filed their lawsuit against Gov. Gavin Newsom and other officials, including the president and members of the Medical Board of California.

They argued the law prevents them from providing information to their patients that may contradict what the law permits or prohibits. They also alleged the law was used to intimidate and punish physicians who disagreed with prevailing views on COVID-19.

Judge William Shubb, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in his ruling (pdf) it was plausible that the medical board would determine their conduct violates AB 2098, and therefore the doctors’ fears are reasonable “given the ambiguity of the term ‘scientific consensus’ and of the definition of ‘misinformation’ as a whole.”

Shubb noted that this weighed in favor of the plaintiffs having standing.

“Because the definition of misinformation ‘fails to provide a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited, [and] is so standardless that it authorizes or encourages seriously discriminatory enforcement,’ the provision is unconstitutionally vague,” Shubb wrote. “Accordingly, the court concludes that plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their vagueness challenges.”

The Law

Newsom signed the bill into law in September 2022, and it took effect on Jan. 1, 2023.

The law defines misinformation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus,” and prohibits physicians from disseminating “misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”

Doctors who deviate from the established U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s guidance by attempting to assess and advise their patients as individuals may run afoul of the new law.

The state medical board is required by law to act against any licensed doctor charged with unprofessional conduct.

The court’s ruling effectively halts the law while the legal challenge plays out.

The legal organization representing the doctors said their clients were put in a difficult position, fearing repercussions for acting in the best interests of their patients by giving them honest information, depriving them of their right to receive advice and hear treatment options without fear of professional discipline.

According to American Civil Liberties Alliance (ACLA), the First Amendment, which protects Americans’ rights to free speech and expression, applies to minority views and majority opinions.

The doctors alleged they have been threatened by other doctors and individuals on social media to use AB 2098 to have their licenses taken away, according to ACLA.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/judge-blocks-californias-covid-19-misinformation-law

FDA Approves Post-Surgical Keytruda for Lung Cancer Subset

 The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Keytruda (pembrolizumab) to be given after surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with stage 1B, 2 or 3A non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to the agency.

The approval is based on findings from a randomized trial, KEYNOTE-091, which included 1,177 patients with NSCLC who had not undergone pre-surgical radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Participants in the study were randomly assigned to one of two groups: one group received intravenous Keytruda every three weeks for up to one year, while the other group received placebo. Then, 86% of patients (1,010 patients) received post-surgical (adjuvant) platinum-based chemotherapy after complete resection.

The main goal of the trial was to determine if Keytruda improve disease-free survival (the time after treatment for cancer when a patient survives without any symptoms or signs of the disease) over placebo, which it did. The average disease-free survival for patients given Keytruda was 58.7 months compared with 34.9 months in patients given a placebo.

In a prior discussion of the KEYNOTE-091 trial from January 2022, one expert explained that the advent of post-surgical Keytruda would be a welcomed addition for this patient population, as approximately 43% of patients with stage 1B, 2 or 3A NSCLC will experience their disease return after undergoing surgery. Of note, the goal of adjuvant therapy is often to prevent or slow cancer’s return after surgery.

Side effects observed in the KEYNOTE-091 trial were similar to what was previously seen in patients with NSCLC who were administered the immunotherapy agent, with the exception of hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism (under- and over-active thyroid function, respectively), and pneumonitis, which is swelling of the lungs.

Two fatal instances of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) occurred on the trial.

https://www.curetoday.com/view/fda-approves-post-surgical-keytruda-for-lung-cancer-subset