Reuters is reporting a "massive" blast at an Iraqi base used by Iran-linked militias south of Baghdad in the overnight hours (local).
"A huge blast rocked a military base used by Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) to the south of Baghdad late on Friday," army sources said to Reuters.
by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,
Joe Biden’s Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, threatened during a congressional hearing to weaponize the Department of Education to target and shut down the largest Christian university in the United States.
As Fox News reports, Cardona made his threats during a hearing before the House Appropriations Committee, in response to a question by far-left Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.). DeLauro attacked Grand Canyon University (CGU), falsely declaring it "a predatory for-profit school," to which Cardona said that “we are cracking down not only to shut them down, but to send a message to not prey on students.”
“You have a shiny brochure and a great commercial,” Cardona said.
“But the product is not worth the paper it’s written on. We have students graduating 60K to 70K dollars in debt, only eligible for jobs making under 30K. That to me is unacceptable.”
GCU has been accused of misleading students about the true cost of some of its doctoral programs, for which Cardona’s Education Department fined the university $37.7 million; the school is currently appealing that fine, which was implemented in November.
Past fines imposed by the Education Department on other schools were significantly smaller, with Penn State being fined just $2.4 million for its failure to deal with Jerry Sandusky’s sexual crimes; Michigan State was fined only $4.5 million for its similar failure to respond to the crimes of Larry Nassar.
In October, the department claimed that an investigation by the office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) determined that GCU had “lied” about the true costs of its doctoral programs to over 7,500 students, while presenting no evidence.
The department then gave GCU just 20 days to request a hearing with the department’s Office of Hearings and Appeals to object to the fine.
“Our next recourse after that decision would be another appeal within the Department, this time directly to the Secretary of Education,” said a GCU spokesman.
“Officials continue to make derogatory and inflammatory public statements that are legally and factually incorrect and not shared by any of the other 26 regulatory and accrediting bodies that oversee GCU,” the GCU spokesman continued.
“The Secretary’s comments to the House Appropriations Committee were so reckless that GCU is demanding an immediate retraction, as they do not reflect the factual record in this case. He is either confused, misinformed or does not understand the actions taken by his own agency.”
In response to Cardona’s threats, the American Principles Project (APP) has launched a petition to “protect Christian colleges.”
The petition says, in part, that in “light of the Biden administration’s unprecedented attacks on our nation’s largest Christian colleges,” the AFP and all signatories to the petition demand that “the administration halt their crusade and let students choose the schools that fit their values.”
Regina Barrett, a 69-year-old retiree who lives in this small North Carolina city southeast of Charlotte, has not been happy with her tap water for a while.
"Our water has been cloudy and bubbly and looks milky," said Barrett, who blames fluoride, a mineral that communities across the nation have for decades added to the water supply to help prevent cavities and improve dental health.
"I don't want fluoride in my nothing!" said Barrett, echoing a growing number of people who not only doubt the mineral's effectiveness but also believe it may be harmful despite decades of data pointing to public health and economic benefits.
In February, the Board of County Commissioners in Union County, whose seat is Monroe, voted 3-2 to stop adding fluoride to drinking water at the Yadkin River Water Treatment Plant, the only water source wholly owned and operated by the county. But the decision came after heated discussions among residents and county officials.
"My children had the blessing of growing up with fluoride in their water and ... they have very little dental issues," said Commissioner Richard Helms ahead of the vote. A fellow commissioner saw it differently: "Let's stop putting something in the water that's meant to treat us, and give people the freedom to choose," said David Williams.
Barrett's water comes from the city of Monroe, not the Yadkin facility. So, for now, she will continue to drink water enhanced with fluoride. "I'm suspicious as to why they add that to our water," she told KFF Health News.
It is a scenario playing out nationwide. From Oregon to Pennsylvania, hundreds of communities have in recent years either stopped adding fluoride to their water supplies or voted to prevent its addition. Supporters of such bans argue that people should be given the freedom of choice. The broad availability of over-the-counter dental products containing the mineral makes it no longer necessary to add it to public water supplies, they say. The CDC says that while store-bought products reduce tooth decay, the greatest protection comes when they are used in combination with water fluoridation.
The outcome of an ongoing federal case in California could force the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create a rule regulating or banning the use of fluoride in drinking water nationwide. In the meantime, the trend is raising alarm bells for public health researchers who worry that, much like vaccines, fluoride may have become a victim of its own success.
The CDC maintains that community water fluoridation is not only safe and effective but also yields significant cost savings in dental treatment. Public health officials say removing fluoride could be particularly harmful to low-income families -- for whom drinking water may be the only source of preventive dental care.
"If you have to go out and get care on your own, it's a whole different ballgame," said Myron Allukian Jr., DDS, MPH, a dentist and past president of the American Public Health Association. Millions of people have lived with fluoridated water for years, "and we've had no major health problems," he said. "It's much easier to prevent a disease than to treat it."
According to the anti-fluoride group Fluoride Action Network, since 2010, over 240 communities around the world have removed fluoride from their drinking water or decided not to add it.
One needs only to look to Union County to see just how intense discussions can be. Usually when the commissioners meet on the first floor of the Government Center in downtown Monroe, there are more vacant seats than attendees. But sessions about the prohibition of fluoride in public water supplies were packed, and residents who signed up to speak were divided.
One person who came to the microphone on February 5 compared water fluoridation to a seat belt. It does not "prevent the car crash, but it limits the harm done," he said. Another argued that there is no proof fluoride is safe or effective. "It's a significant potential milestone to reverse 60-plus years of poisoning the public," he said, using an unproven claim often made by opponents of fluoridation.
Fluoride opponents claim the mineral is responsible for everything from acne to high blood pressure and thyroid dysfunction to bone cancer.
The National Institutes of Health acknowledges that, when ingested in extremely large amounts, fluoride from dental products or dietary supplements can cause nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, bone pain, and even death in extremely rare cases.
Infants and children who receive too much fluoride can develop discoloration or small dents in their teeth. In adults, consumption of excessive fluoride for extended periods can lead to skeletal fluorosis, a very rare condition that causes joint pain and stiffness, weak bones, muscle loss, and nerve problems.
However, the recommended dosage in drinking water has always been small. In 2015, HHS lowered the optimal fluoride concentration from 1.2 milligrams per liter to 0.7 mg/L.
Juneau, Alaska, voted to remove fluoride from its drinking water in 2007. A study published in the journal BMC Oral Health in 2018 compared the dental records of children and adolescents who received dental care for decaying teeth 4 years before and 5 years after the city stopped adding fluoride to the water. Cavity-related procedures and treatment costs were significantly higher in the latter group, the study found.
Portland, Oregon, is the largest city in the nation that has consistently refused to fluoridate its drinking water. Voters have repeatedly rejected measures to add it, first in 1956, and the latest time in 2013.
Despite the strong recommendation of local doctors and dentists, voters in Wichita, Kansas, have rejected adding fluoride to the water several times, most recently in 2012.
The Brushy Creek Municipal Utility District in Williamson County, Texas, had been adding fluoride to its water system since 2007 but ended the practice in December.
In 2016, Collier County, Florida, commissioners opted not to remove fluoride from the water system. But they unanimously reversed that decision following a 2023 Health Freedom Bill of Rights county ordinance in response to COVID-19 "to safeguard the healthcare rights and freedoms of Collier County residents."
The State College Borough Water Authority in Pennsylvania stopped adding fluoride to the water of its 75,000 customers in March 2023. Officials used claims often cited by fluoride opponents, such as potential environmental contamination, concerns about medical freedom, and possible adverse health effects, like the potential for the appearance of faint white lines on the teeth and lowered IQ for babies.
A study published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2019, conducted in six Canadian cities, associated fluoride exposure during pregnancy with lower IQ scores in children. But the study was based on self-reporting and has been criticized for its perceived methodological shortcomings.
In 2016, several consumer advocacy groups, including the Fluoride Action Network, Food & Water Watch, and Moms Against Fluoridation, petitioned the EPA to end water fluoridation under the Toxic Substances Control Act, alleging that significant research showed fluoride was neurotoxic at the doses now used. The same group filed a federal lawsuit against the EPA the following year, after the agency denied their citizen petition.
During a 10-day bench trial in San Francisco that concluded in mid-February, the two sides debated the risks and areas of uncertainty. If Senior U.S. District Judge Edward Chen determines water fluoridation presents an "unreasonable risk" to human health, the EPA will be forced to create a rule regulating or banning water fluoridation in the U.S. -- a decision is expected soon.
For the time being, decisions about whether to fluoridate community water systems are still made primarily at the local level, which Barrett hopes will change.
"Of all things, they want our teeth healthy when basic needs of housing and food are lacking."
https://www.medpagetoday.com/primarycare/dentalhealth/109733
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) is cutting off certain publications from advanced access to its embargoed journal articles.
News outlets that report for physician readers will no longer meet criteria for embargoed access, Dawn Peters, director of strategic communications & media relations at NEJM Group, said in an email to MedPage Today.
Access will unwind as reporters apply to renew their media credentials with the journal, Peters said, confirming that some applications from MedPage Today writers have been denied because the publication "primarily serves clinicians and health care professionals."
The exact reason for the change isn't clear, but Peters said that medical publishing "has changed considerably, as have our own publications" since NEJM introduced its embargoed access policy decades ago.
She noted that journal parent company NEJM Group has grown to include "several journals to which physicians and clinical professionals can subscribe." That has happened as the number of media outlets focused on medical professionals have increased, she said.
"Much of the content in these media outlets summarize articles in our journals, tailored at a level of understanding for clinicians who can access this information directly from us," Peters said. "We must take this into consideration when granting advanced media access to our content."
Ivan Oransky, MD, who has held leadership positions at medical news publications focused on healthcare professionals over the last two decades (including at MedPage Today), said the explanation "strongly suggests that NEJM now sees anyone writing for a clinical audience as competition and is therefore restricting access of its flagship publication from the competition."
"What NEJM is doing here is restricting access and apparently trying to grow their market share," added Oransky, who has also written about embargoes extensively and taught medical journalism at New York University for decades. "They're going to prioritize that over the free and transparent and sometimes critical flow of clinical information."
Oransky said it's a "really bad policy" for a host of reasons. The embargo system was developed so that reporters would have enough time to report on medical studies accurately without the threat of being scooped -- which could lead to inaccurate, sloppy, or rushed reporting.
"This seems like it's a way backward with embargoes," he said, noting that either all media should be able to access studies under embargo, or no member of the press should receive early access.
George Lundberg, MD, former editor-in-chief of JAMA, said it's "amazing how long [the embargoed access system] has endured."
"This embargo approach was always mostly about preserving a journal's image and a publisher's brand," he said. "It is really all about market share."
When asked if the updated policy applies to freelancers, who may work for a combination of consumer and trade publications, Peters said each application will be handled individually. To qualify, freelancers must write "regular, original news content ... for publications that serve the general public."
Indeed, language on the NEJM Media Center homepage pertaining to freelancers was updated late this week, moving eligibility from "Freelance journalists and editors covering health care topics for news organizations" to "Freelance reporters covering health care topics for organizations producing content for non-clinical audiences."
"What is this, like a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy?" Oransky asked. "I can't pitch [MedPage Today], I can only pitch the New York Times? It's not well thought out."
Peters did not confirm whether NEJM also has restricted access to embargoed material for other physician-focused publications, including Medscape, Healio, and MJH Life Sciences publications. Instead, she reiterated that individual reporters' applications will be considered when they renew their access.
Peters added that NEJM would provide MedPage Today reporters with a complimentary subscription, "which will provide them with access to content upon publication."
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/109756
A specific autoantibody signature was seen in a subset of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) long before clinical symptoms appeared, blood samples showed.
A distinct set of autoantibodies emerged in approximately 10% of MS patients up to 5 years before symptoms were seen, reported Michael Wilson, MD, of the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), and co-authors. The autoantibodies appeared to bind to both human cells and common pathogens and were associated with higher levels of serum neurofilament light (NfL).
The autoantibody profile was preserved over time, suggesting an immunologically active preclinical period years before clinical onset, Wilson and colleagues wrote in Nature Medicine.
This signature may be a starting point to further characterize this patient subset and could be clinically useful as an antigen-specific biomarker for high-risk patients with clinically isolated or radiologically isolated syndromes, they added.
"We know B cells -- the cells that make antibodies -- are crucial for MS disease progression," said co-author Colin Zamecnik, PhD, also of UCSF. "As a result, we believed that profiling the antibodies in patients who have or go on to develop MS would give us insight into the disease and reveal a possible biomarker," he told MedPage Today.
The findings suggest that a subset of people who develop MS have antibodies against a common protein domain prevalent in humans and viruses, Zamecnik noted.
"These patients exhibit these antibodies many years before onset, and when tested at the time of their first disease flare, have them in both their blood and cerebrospinal fluid," he continued. "We believe it's possible that these patients are exhibiting cross-reactive response to a prior infection, which agrees with much current work in the literature around multiple sclerosis disease progression."
The study assessed data from the Department of Defense Serum Repository, the same source that previously helped establish a link between Epstein-Barr virus and MS. The repository stores blood from more than 10 million U.S. armed service members when they apply to join the military. The researchers used phage display immunoprecipitation sequencing (PhIP-Seq) to screen blood samples for autoantibodies.
The Department of Defense cohort contained 250 MS patients 5 years before and 1 year after first symptom onset and 250 controls matched for age, sex, race or ethnicity, and serum collection dates. The researchers validated their findings in a sample from the prospective UCSF ORIGINS cohort, which included 103 patients who had their first attack and were subsequently diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS.
Overall, serum NfL levels were higher in people with MS years before their first clinical flare compared with matched controls. In the Department of Defense cohort, 10% of people with MS had an abundance of autoantibodies and a distinct immunogenic cluster motif that's present not only in humans but several human pathogens including Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis C virus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Aspergillus fumigatus. This pattern was seen both before and after these people were diagnosed with MS.
In the ORIGINS cohort, 10% of people diagnosed with MS had the same autoantibody pattern. The pattern predicted an MS diagnosis; across both cohorts, all people with this autoantibody pattern had MS.
The role of autoantibodies in MS remains unclear, and many candidate autoantigens have not survived validation studies, Wilson and colleagues pointed out. But other rare demyelinating diseases like neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease were originally part of the MS spectrum and were definitively separated only after disease-specific autoantibodies were identified, they added.
What occurred in the 10% subset of MS patients versus the remaining 90% is unclear. The sample size was small, and genetic or other associations could not be determined. And while similarity existed between this motif and those found in other infectious agents, this study measured antibodies to only a limited set of antiviral antigens, Wilson and co-authors acknowledged.
Nonetheless, the researchers are optimistic that these findings might lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment for some MS patients. "Imagine if we could diagnose MS before some patients reach the clinic," said UCSF co-author Stephen Hauser, MD. "It enhances our chances of moving from suppression to cure."
Disclosures
This work was supported by the Valhalla Foundation, the Weill Neurohub, the Westridge Foundation, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Department of Defense, the German Society of Multiple Sclerosis, and others.
Wilson reported receiving unrelated research grant funding from Roche/Genentech and Novartis, as well as speaking honoraria from Genentech, Takeda, WebMD, and Novartis. He and a co-author also reported receiving licensing fees from CDI Labs.
Co-authors reported relationships with Neuroimmune Foundation, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, IgM Biosciences, Genentech, Horizon, Atara Bio, QIA Consulting, and Sanofi/Genzyme.
Primary Source
Nature Medicine
Source Reference: Zamecnik CR, et al "An autoantibody signature predictive for multiple sclerosis" Nat Med 2024; DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-02938-3.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/neurology/multiplesclerosis/109767
The great market rally of 2024 looks dangerously close to unraveling as Wall Street’s once-invincible bull brigade begins to withdraw its winnings.
With Treasury yields breaking out, Federal Reserve hawks ascendant and Middle East strife flaring, money has just been pulled out of equities and junk bonds at the fastest rate in more than a year. Dip-buyers have been muzzled. The S&P 500 fell every day this week as the top seven tech behemoths closed nearly 8% lower, with equity volatility climbing.
New York City is suffering a retail catastrophe, with 11.2% of storefronts empty — nearly twice the 6% of 2019. Oswald Feliz is a Democratic member of the City Council representing District 15 in The Bronx and also chairs the Small Business Committee, says the city and state must take action to staunch the bleeding — particularly on the scourge of retail theft.
New Yorkers work hard, and none harder than first-time small-business owners.
These are individuals who spend long days and long nights away from their family, and filled with excitement and pride about owning their own shop.
They toil not only to achieve economic stability, but also to open new doors and opportunities for their children.
How disheartening, then, is it for them to see shoplifters destroying their life’s work, knowing that they can get away with theft again and again?
Would you feel comfortable opening a business in a community facing this challenge?
Would it even be possible for a business to stay afloat under these circumstances?
There must be deterrence and accountability for individuals who profit by vandalizing the hard work of small-business owners and harm our small-business corridors.
Not a poor problem
These aren’t poor people desperate for food and money.
We must sympathize and treat with compassion those that, for example, engage in theft because they are hungry.
I’ve spoken with countless bodega and small-restaurant owners and they’ve consistently stated they would never deny basic necessities to someone in that position.
Many of these small-business owners have faced economic instability before and know what struggle looks like.
But the real and escalating threat is the small number of individuals who engage in theft because they know they can get away with it.
Those that enter bodegas and retail stores, and walk away with all of the high-ticket items, which they then resell.
When I meet with small business owners in my area — and I represent Fordham Road, the busiest corridor in The Bronx, along with Arthur Avenue and East Tremont, lifebloods of the community — the No. 1 issue is retail theft.
Politicians who say bills that have decriminalized shoplifting are not an issue and the problems are being exaggerated are in denial.
Before you know it, we have streets full of “going out of business” signs. It hurts the business owners, but it also hurts the customers and the neighborhoods and the social fabric of the entire city.
Vandalizing hard work
We cannot accept a system where individuals are allowed to vandalize their hard work — and make a profit by doing so.
The issue of burglaries also deserves attention.
In February, a bodega in the Bronx was broken into, and the owner lost over $100,000 in cash.
Just imagine how many days and months that owner spent away from his family to save up that amount?
Just think about the plans and dreams he had with those funds — including potentially expanding his business.
And then, from one second to the next, his savings are gone.
That is unacceptable.
Recently, I introduced the Small Business Protection Act, to provide grants that would help small businesses cover security-related expenses such as cameras, plexiglass, and alarms, to help deter unlawful conduct.
I’m also grateful that Governor Hochul has made the matter a priority, and has taken new measures at the state level to protect retail businesses and workers.
The benefits that small businesses bring to our communities are countless.
We must stand up for them now, before those empty storefronts become a blight we cannot stop.
