Enduring Lawlessness in Our Cities

 Americans are worried about crime on their streets, but President Biden and the mainstream press corps don’t think that they should be. ABC News claims that “violent crime is dramatically falling.” NBC News asserts that “the drop in crime does not appear to be well understood by large majorities of Americans.” And in his State of the Union address, Biden bragged about a purported drop in crime that was allegedly a result of his efforts.

While the administration and its allies are trying to convince Americans that the crime spike that they think they’ve seen in recent years has been a mirage, the public should trust its own judgment. The best available figures, from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), show a whopping 58 percent rise in violent crime in urban areas from 2019—before the summer of George Floyd, BLM, and the “defund the police” crusade—to 2022, the most recent year for which finalized federal statistics are available.

The numbers are even worse on closer inspection. If one removes from that period the bar fights and other similar encounters that make up much of the “simple assault” category, urban areas have seen a 73 percent spike in more serious violent crimes. That’s a huge rise in violence in the nation’s cities that the media aren’t interested in acknowledging. They are also unwilling to admit that cities have retried the experiment in lax law enforcement first attempted roughly a half-century ago. The verdict is in, and once again, the results are not pretty.

Much as with inflation, however, Biden and his media allies are pushing the notion that Americans should be happy, because the worst of the spike could be in the rearview mirror. That’s a tough sell. While the recent homicide spike appears to have peaked in 2021, and the recent inflation spike in 2022, overall violent crime in urban areas and consumer prices across the nation are both noticeably worse now than they were just a few years ago.

Biden nevertheless has insisted that crime has generally been brought under control, and that his policies are to thank for it. In his State of the Union address in March, the president said, “The year before I took office, murders went up 30% nationwide.” While Biden wants to pin that huge increase on Donald Trump, the combination of policies that led to that historic homicide surge—lax prosecution, Covid lockdowns, and the stoking of race-based grievances—were clearly pushed by progressives far more than by conservatives.

Later in the speech, Biden suggested that his massive Covid stimulus package has helped reduce crime: “Now, through my American Rescue Plan, which every Republican voted against, I’ve made the largest investment in public safety ever.” In fact, less than 1 percent of the first $1.1 trillion in borrowed money disbursed under that bill went toward public safety.

Finally, Biden asserted, “Last year, the murder rate saw the sharpest decrease in history, and violent crime fell to one of the lowest levels in more than 50 years.” This statement is puzzling—in fact, one wonders what Biden is talking about. The FBI statistics released last year, which report 2022 figures, don’t show a record-setting decline in murder rates. They do report that 2022’s violent-crime rate was higher than 2014’s, the year that the Ferguson, Missouri riots—and President Obama’s reaction to them—sparked the anti-policing movement.

If Biden were instead relying on preliminary FBI figures for 2023, rather than on the 2022 data released last year, that’s problematic, too—especially since he made it sound like he was using fully processed, validated, and finalized federal statistics, as one would expect from a president during a formal address to Congress. The preliminary FBI figures for 2023, which contain no reporting from 21 percent of the nation’s law enforcement agencies, haven’t been fully processed or validated. There’s a reason such figures haven’t yet been released as final.

In truth, it’s hard to compare even the FBI’s 2022 numbers with any years prior to 2021, when the FBI switched to a new reporting system. Thirty percent of the nation’s law enforcement agencies in 2021, and 17 percent in 2022, didn’t use the new reporting system and therefore weren’t included in the FBI’s stats. Among the missing agencies in 2022 were giants like the New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco police departments.

Reliable federal statistics for 2023 likely won’t be released until September, when the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) typically publishes the NCVS. Around that time, the FBI will also release its finalized statistics for 2023. Those figures won’t easily lend themselves to comparisons with the FBI’s 2019 figures, compiled under the previous reporting system, and even comparisons with 2022 and 2021 could be distorted by the different mixes of reporting agencies involved. It’s also worth noting that FBI statistics don’t include crimes not reported to police. As self-identified victims tell the NCVS, nearly 60 percent of violent crimes, and about two-thirds of property crimes, aren’t reported to the authorities.

While the preliminary FBI statistics for 2023, based on not-yet-fully processed or validated data from just 79 percent of the nation’s law enforcement agencies, aren’t yet fully baked and can’t tell us much, it’s possible to glean some knowledge of 2023 trends by comparing that year’s homicide rates in major metros with those areas’ own data from prior years. According to Police Test Info, the half-dozen largest local law enforcement agencies, based on their number of sworn officers, are the New York Police Department, the Chicago Police Department, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD), the Philadelphia Police Department, and the Houston Police Department. Five of these six agencies reported declines in homicides from 2022 to 2023, ranging from 11 percent to 20 percent. (The L.A. County Sheriff’s Department showed a 9 percent increase.) Taken in combination, the six agencies showed a 14 percent decline in homicides from 2022 to 2023.

These declines, however, are nowhere near enough to compensate for the huge murder spike from 2019 to 2022. Indeed, homicides across all six agencies rose from 2019 to 2022 by a combined 46 percent. (Unlike the FBI’s national figures, this comparison involves the same mix of agencies for the two years in question.) Even as all but one of these departments saw welcome declines in 2023, the total number of homicides within their jurisdictions still rose by large margins from 2019 to 2023—by 23 percent in New York, 23 percent in Chicago, 29 percent in Los Angeles per the LAPD (and 47 percent per the LASD, which covers the whole county), 16 percent in Philadelphia, and 29 percent in Houston. Across all six agencies combined, the number of homicides rose 25 percent from 2019 to 2023.

When BJS publishes the 2023 NCVS early this fall, it won’t be surprising if it shows a similar trend—a reduction in urban violent crime from 2022 to 2023 that doesn’t come close to negating the 58 percent increase from 2019 to 2022. But for now, the only truly reliable national statistics for making cross-year comparisons only cover through 2022. According to those numbers, America’s urban areas have collectively seen nothing but increases in violent crime since our most recent experiment in lenient law enforcement began.

This surge in urban violence, of course, comes amid the scourge in many areas of tent cities, drug addicts on streets, marijuana stench, and orchestrated shoplifting, giving the cumulative impression that great cities are abandoning civilized norms. Cities today are pursuing the opposite of “Broken Windows” policing, ignoring pettier crimes, inviting a general sense of disorderliness, and effectively encouraging more severe acts of lawlessness. This reality is not a figment of Americans’ imaginations.

Jeffrey H. Anderson is president of the American Main Street Initiative, a think tank for everyday Americans. He served as director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice from 2017 to 2021.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-urban-violent-crime-spike-is-real

American Intifada

 The American intifada unfolding on our campuses has enough foot soldiers for a pogrom, but not enough for a revolution, yet.

The campaign of intimidation and violence exploded mid-April when anti-Zionists set up an encampment on the West Lawn of Columbia University. Columbia President Minouche Shafik failed to remove them swiftly, so the activists chased the Jewish students off campus.  

In one somewhat creepy but rather hilarious incident, an anti-Zionist mob was filmed pushing Jews off the territory they stalked. Their vigilant leader Khywani James, noticing an approaching party of Hebrews, screamed, “[W]e have Zionists attempting to enter the lawn!” He quickly assembled the masses into a human chain and got them to repeat after him One step forward! One step forward! Another step forward! Another step forward! as they walked, Zombie-like, toward the intruders. The fright ended when the Jews failed to budge, politely explaining they had every right to be on that lawn. James was eventually banned from the campus for having threatened to kill Zionists.

Nevertheless, the university went on a lockdown the day after, and Professor Shai Davidai, who can be best described as the opposition leader, was not provided with security to walk to his office. Eventually, Columbia cancelled its traditional graduation ceremony.

Karl Marx once observed that revolutions are contagious. Energized by their success at Columbia, anti-Israel organizers vowed to spread their encampment colonies to other American universities. Participants marked territory with tents and terrorist signage. They took down American flags and raised Palestinian flags, reciting various genocidal and pro-terrorist chants and slogans. The alleged terrorist Hatem Abudayyeh threatened two American journalists. A Jewish woman was assaulted at Yale, as was a man in a kippah at CUNY; there were countless assaults, actually. Tai Lee of Stop Cop City, the group charged with terrorism in Georgia, called for violence against law enforcement. One thug went on a tirade about killing whitey.

How many campus agitators are students and faculty is unclear. The Neturei Karta cult pictured storming into the Fashion Institute of Technology campus are almost certainly not enrolled there. One masked USC protestor admitted she’s not a student and was attending the event in solidarity. An anti-Zionist media figurehead bragged about going to the Columbia encampment for a seder. Cops at Arizona State University said that the majority of the few dozen trespassers they’ve arrested are neither teaching nor studying there. The movement’s most high profile leader, Nerdeen Kiswani, is not a student. Encampments are set up with the assistance of trained professionals and funded through well-heeled domestic NGOs like George Soros’s Tides Foundation, and perhaps from foreign donors.

To be fair, it’s not uncommon for student movements to employ professional help or beef up their ranks with outsiders. But if 6,000 rioters turned out to claim an empty lot for People’s Park in Berkeley in 1968, the Palestine draw is comparatively modest.

On April 23, two dozen tents were observed on the steps of Sproul Hall in Berkeley. Even in the relatively apolitical nineties, Berkeley rallies easily dwarfed the current anti-Zionist hangout. Likewise, the MIT encampment was made up of just a few tents. An eyewitness reported 100 students and faculty at Northwestern getting arrested. It appears that most of the copycat tent villages are lucky to attract more than a few dozen campers.

Only a handful of universities turned out more. According to Freedomnews.tv, hundreds showed up for the anticipated Columbia standoff with law enforcement on April 23. The organizers’ statement called on “people of conscience” to join, but with all the reinforcements the movement couldn’t fill the lawn on its marquee campus.

On April 25, Kiswani urged action from people all over New York City at her event at CUNY. I’m sure people from all over NYC turned up, but, again, the crowd didn’t overflow. But two days later, hundreds of spectators assembled in Union Square to watch a man eat a jar of cheese balls.

Maybe all of these groups together can add up to 6,000 and cause some damage locally—People’s Park was a squatter druggie colony for over half a century until the university finally worked up the will to evict them. However, anti-Zionist groups appeared to have adopted the strategy of BLM and Occupy protests—they spread out. As such, their numbers are insufficient to control the country—not even BLM had the troops for that.

This is not lost on socialists who have been very tight with the Palestinian movement since its launching by the KGB in the sixties. For instance, the socialist writer Jerry White advised: “[S]tudents can’t defeat the state on their own or on the campuses. They must turn to the working class to defend their rights and defeat imperialist war.” That’s how it’s supposed to work in Marxism-Leninism, theoretically. But if the American working class can’t be bothered to free itself from its chains, they can’t be expected to free Gaza from the existence of their Jewish neighbors. Universities are the natural allies of Hamas, and they are mostly underperforming.

In response to campus disturbances, Center for Immigration Studies suggested that universities rethink foreign admissions policies. CIS noted that at Columbia, 36,649 individuals, or 55 percent of the student body, are foreign exchange. Some of the most zealous protesters appear to be from the Middle East, speak fluent Arabic, and be steeped in the regional mentality. One man was recorded instructing students about the finer aspects of martyrdom, as captured in Arabic anti-Zionist chants. Who said the Ivies are useless education?

It might just be that the Palestinian cause appears inherently unattractive to American audiences. Even when college students and faculty may reflexively support it, they are not emotionally invested. Some may attend events because they can’t say no, like the one woman who admitted she hasn’t looked into the movement’s demands, she just came out in solidarity. But most people are uninterested because they are more reflective.

It’s hard to shake off the bad impressions left by Hamas on 10/7. The charge of genocide habitually leveled at Israel breaks apart with a minimal application of critical thought. The movement of hysterical youth that hysterically charges its enemies with genocide is not a good draw.

The campus intifada is more than a problem of anti-Semitism. Sure, it’s mostly the Jewish students who get stalked and assaulted at the moment. But the real issue is not the physical violence—or even that, in the Ayatollah Khomeini’s turn of phrase, Israel is the little Satan, America is the big one. It’s the ability of the perpetrators to control the daily life of a university. Access to common areas can’t be restricted to self-appointed post-colonial revolutionaries.

There is no reason why we should import Islamic extremists to assault citizens and stage illegal occupations of university properties. One day they may have enough followers to fill up that lawn in Columbia—or enough voters to elect their desired government.

We can’t allow indoctrination of American teens either. Expulsion of a handful of particularly vicious undergrads is not enough; the entire system that propagandizes the impressionable and encourages intrusion on our rights has to go.

https://americanmind.org/salvo/american-intifada/

US Imposes Sanctions On Chinese Companies Vital To Russia's Defense Industry

 The Biden administration and US Treasury on Wednesday unveiled nearly 300 new anti-Russia sanctions which especially target third party entities which are said to help Moscow in sanctions-busting activities.

"The almost 300 targets being sanctioned by both Treasury and the Department of State include sanctions on dozens of actors that have enabled Russia to acquire desperately needed technology and equipment from abroad," the Treasury Department said in a press release.

So-called dual-use items out of China are a key focus of the action, which is being hailed as one of "the most wide-ranging actions against Chinese companies so far in Washington's sanctions aimed at Russia." 20 companies based in China and Hong Kong were named.

Companies in Turkey, Belgium, Azerbaijan, Slovakia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are also targeted.

"Treasury has consistently warned that companies will face significant consequences for providing material support for Russia’s war, and the U.S. is imposing them today on almost 300 targets," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said.

It also marks the furthest reaching action that seeks to specifically degrade Russia’s military-industrial base, as well as its biological and chemical weapons programs. For example, companies involved in manufacturing precursor materials for Russia to make explosives are listed.

Last week during Secretary of State Antony Blinken's visit to China he warned about Beijing's support for Russia's war in Ukraine. "Russia would struggle to sustain its assault on Ukraine without China’s support," Blinken had claimed provocatively, while also asserting China is the "top supplier" of Russia's defense industrial base - albeit not in terms of lethal aid (but instead "dual use" technologies).

This support to Russia's defense industry additionally constitutes a "medium to long-term threat that many Europeans feel viscerally that Russia poses to them," Blinken had asserted.

Meanwhile, as Ukraine forces continue getting pushed back from frontline positions by the better-armed Russian force, hawkish threats out of Congress are getting more frantic...

He warned last week that the Biden administration stood ready to introduce more sanctions against China if dual-use goods and technologies continue to be sent to Russia, including things previously identified by Washington as problematic: semiconductors, machine tools, chemical precursors, ball bearings, and optical systems. Based on Wednesday's Treasury action it is clear that the sanctions were already being prepared even as Blinken was on the three-day trip, which including a meeting with President Xi.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-imposes-sanctions-chinese-companies-vital-russias-defense-industry

Jews fight back at UCLA and then Mayor Karen Bass sends in the police

 The Democrat mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, didn’t send police onto the campus of UCLA when pro-Hamas demonstrators took over parts of it and prevented Jews from entering, just as Nazis once blocked Jewish students from the University of Vienna. A Jewish girl being beaten unconscious and hospitalized also drew no police response to the state government-owned campus.  But when non-student members of the Jewish community of Los Angeles entered the campus and began physically confronting the pro-Hamas demonstrators and videos of fights went out on internet, after two-plus hours [update: 3+ hours] of mayhem, the Mayor decided to send in the cops.

While I cannot condone outsiders coming onto a campus to fight, it needs to be stipulated that pro-Hamas outsiders were the first to enter UCLA turf, and that the non-student Jews who entered campus to fight were responding with the same tactic, to protect community members.

It is hard for me to avoid comparison to a little-remembered incident from the 1930s, when virulently antisemitic groups openly demonstrated and excoriated Jews along the same themes as the contemporary Nazis. The worst of it took place in Minneapolis, later characterized by prominent journalist Carey McWilliams as  “the capitol (sic) of anti-Semitism in the United States."

A group called the Silver Shirts, self-consciously modeled on Mussolini’s Black Shirts, held a rally and:

In Minneapolis, William Dudley Pelley organized a Silver Shirt Legion to "rescue" America from an imaginary Jewish-Communist conspiracy. In Pelley’s own words, just as "Mussolini and his Black Shirts saved Italy and as Hitler and his Brown Shirts saved Germany," he would save America from Jewish communists. Minneapolis gambling czar David Berman confronted Pelley’s Silver Shirts on behalf of the Minneapolis Jewish community.

Berman learned that Silver Shirts were mounting a rally at a nearby Elks’ Lodge. When the Nazi leader called for all the "Jew bastards" in the city to be expelled, or worse, Berman and his associates burst in to the room and started cracking heads. After ten minutes, they had emptied the hall. His suit covered in blood, Berman took the microphone and announced, "This is a warning. Anybody who says anything against Jews gets the same treatment. Only next time it will be worse." After Berman broke up two more rallies, there were no more public Silver Shirt meetings in Minneapolis.  (Via Jewish Virtual Library)

I don’t for a second believe that any of the Jewish outsiders at UCLA were gangsters. It may be a measure of our time that ordinary Americans of persecuted ethnicities taking violent measures to defend themselves has been lionized by the leftist cultural establishment when the persecuted minority was African-American. Somehow, I doubt they will grant the same indulgence to Jews. After all, does anyone think that Mayor Karen Bass would have tolerated for days Blacks being excluded from parts of UCLA’s campus by KKK activists?

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/jews_fight_back_at_ucla_and_then_mayor_karen_bass_sends_in_the_police.html

Joe Biden plots to import Gaza's 'refugees'

 By Monica Showalter

Joe Biden is running for re-election and behind in the polls.

He's desperate to satisfy his 'death to America' base in places like Dearborn and at campus protests.

So now he's come up with a new sweetender to bring those voters back.

Importing Gaza "refugees," despite the war, from the Gaza side at least, being about staying in place at home and taking over Israel, too.

According to CBS News:

The Biden administration is considering bringing certain Palestinians to the U.S. as refugees, a move that would offer a permanent safe haven to some of those fleeing war-torn Gaza, according to internal federal government documents obtained by CBS News.

In recent weeks, the documents show, senior officials across several federal U.S. agencies have discussed the practicality of different options to resettle Palestinians from Gaza who have immediate family members who are American citizens or permanent residents.

One of those proposals involves using the decades-old United States Refugee Admissions Program to welcome Palestinians with U.S. ties who have managed to escape Gaza and enter neighboring Egypt, according to the inter-agency planning documents.

Top U.S. officials have also discussed getting additional Palestinians out of Gaza and processing them as refugees if they have American relatives, the documents show. The plans would require coordination with Egypt, which has so far refused to welcome large numbers of people from Gaza.

Those who pass a series of eligibility, medical and security screenings would qualify to fly to the U.S. with refugee status, which offers beneficiaries permanent residency, resettlement benefits like housing assistance and a path to American citizenship.

So fighting the war to stay in Gaza isn't quite as nice as a big, free, benefit package, and a life on the public dime over in the U.S. instead. Never mind that Hamas, which started the war with Israel, nominally did so to establish a homeland for Palestinians and screams loudly about 'forced relocation,' which plenty of people in Israel, understandably enough, would like to see done. Who needs a homeland when you've got Omrika, handed out free of charge? Maybe you can fly back and forth, paid for with U.S. funds, and fist-wave against the U.S. in both countries.

And maybe Biden should explain why the U.S., which is a prime terrorist target, is importing in people that every other Arab countries refuses to allow in? We know what the issue is there -- they don't want terrorist nesting grounds established with an imported coterie of 'refugees' from Gaza.

Because the big problem with importing Gaza refugees is how to separate them from the hate-Israel and hate-America ideology that they've been steeped in since birth.  How many of these so-called refugees danced at the monstrous massacre of Israeli civilians in their homes or dancing at a music festival on October 7? Based on the photos seen, it was thousands of them. And that's not surprising, because they also willingly elected Hamas to be their leaders.

Oh, sure, the Biden camp leaking to CBS News says that they'll be processed with "security screenings." We all know how well those go, startin with the thousands of 'refugees' Biden imported from Afghanistan, based on their willingness to push, shove, knock down and trample women, children, elderly, and sick people waiting in line, and never mind about the military translators, who got left behind. Recent revelations show that many of this bunch had no identification cards or were on terrorist watchlists. Biden let them all in and now nobody knows where they are. That's some 'screening.'

Gaza, where Hamas controls everything, will be just as bad. Just as Hamas controls all the food in the country, feeding its fat, doughy "fighters" with the 'aid' while leaving women and children to starve or serve as human shields for propaganda purposes, so it will control who gets to be a refugee.

How useful does anyone think it will be for Hamas to get a nest of operatives into the states for an encore of October 7 against the Great Satan Himself? And if not that, how useful would it be for Hamas to get a "community" of October 7 dancers, not waving their gun-guns, but electing a member of Congress to throw their weight around, much as America-hating migrants such as Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Rashida Tlaib already do? One, two, many, Omars in Congress, sounds very much like an idea Hamas could embrace.

Sure, Biden says the only ones they'll let in are those with 'ties' to the states. That doesn't screen at all for Hamas supporters, given the kind of migrants we know are already here. What's more, to import refugees legitimately, and I don't anticipate they'll follow the rules on this, CBS notes that the law is as follows:

To qualify to enter the U.S. as a refugee, applicants have to prove they are fleeing persecution based on certain factors, such as their nationality, religion or political views.

Israel is going only after Hamas and trying to spare civilian casualties, so item one, on the 'nationality' factor is out. Same with 'religion.' Item three is about 'political views.' What kind of political views are these people likely to have that engenders "persecution" from Israel? That's right, pro-Hamas views. This looks like Joe Biden's plan to 'save Hamas' more than anything else, by bringing them over here.

With the border already overrun by all comers, this importation of hostile, anti-American 'refugees' with a full free ride from Uncle Sam and a pathway to citizenship can only be a plot to import more America-haters in a bid to influence elections.

If this isn't an outrageous idea well worth fighting, what is? The lawsuits should be fast, thick and heavy on this, if there's is one thing America doesn't need, it's people who celebrate and abet terrorists of the most heinous kind.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/05/the_border_is_out_of_control_so_what_better_for_joe_biden_than_to_import_gaza_s_refugees_too.html

Elevated Risk Of Eye Inflammatory Disorder Following COVID-19 Vaccination: Study

 by Megan Redshaw, J.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People with a history of uveitis may experience a recurrence of the eye inflammatory disorder following COVID-19 vaccination, especially in the early postvaccination period.

A recently published study in JAMA Ophthalmology found that about 17 percent of nearly 474,000 vaccinated individuals with a history of uveitis experienced a recurrence within one year after vaccination.

Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye that occurs when the immune system is fighting an infection or attacks healthy tissue in the eyes. It can cause symptoms including pain, redness, and vision loss while damaging the uvea and other parts of the eye.

Researchers collected data on all individuals diagnosed with uveitis in South Korea between January 2015 and February 2021 to determine the risk of recurrence after COVID-19 vaccination. Data was retrieved from the Korean National Health Insurance Service and Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency databases. The incidence of uveitis was assessed from Feb. 26, 2021, to Dec. 31, 2022. The cases were classified according to the onset at three months, six months, and one year, the type of uveitis (anterior or nonanterior), and vaccine type.

Individuals included in the study received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, or Johnson & Johnson and did not test positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period.

Study Findings

Of the 473,934 individuals included in the study, the cumulative incidence of postvaccination uveitis was 8.6 percent at three months, 12.5 percent at six months, and 16.8 percent at one year—primarily of the anterior type, which affects the iris at the front of the eye. Moreover, the risk of uveitis reoccurrence was highest in the first 30 days after vaccination, peaked between the first and second vaccine doses, and decreased with subsequent vaccinations.

According to the researchers, the first dose of the vaccine may activate inflammatory pathways leading to initial inflammation in people who are prone to autoimmune reactions or have a history of uveitis. However, there’s a declining risk with repeated vaccination that may be due to the immune system’s adaptation to the vaccine antigen, although further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Additionally, the risk of experiencing the condition increased among recipients of all four vaccine types, especially among those who received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. These patients were more likely to experience uveitis recurrence during the early-onset period. Likewise, those who received Moderna were at a higher risk of experiencing uveitis after the first vaccination and during the early-onset period.

Notably, there were variations in the types of uveitis observed in the periods before and after vaccination. Among patients with infectious uveitis prior to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, nearly 54 percent had noninfectious uveitis after being vaccinated, whereas most of the individuals with noninfectious uveitis before vaccination had a recurrence of the same type after vaccination.

Most patients with uveitis were 60 to 79 years old, followed by those aged 40 to 59. Among those with comorbidities, high blood pressure, diabetes, and rheumatic diseases were the most common.

“Although uveitis following vaccination is rare, our findings support an increased risk after COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in the early postvaccination period,” the authors wrote. “These results emphasize the importance of vigilance and monitoring for uveitis in the context of vaccinations, including COVID-19 vaccinations, particularly in individuals with a history of uveitis.”

Other Studies of Vaccine-Associated Uveitis

Other studies have found an association between uveitis and COVID-19 vaccination, including a February 2023 study published in Ophthalmology. The study provided insights into a possible temporal association between reported vaccine-associated events and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson.

Moreover, ocular adverse events have been reported following COVID-19 vaccination in addition to uveitis, including facial nerve palsy, retinal vascular occlusion, acute macular neuroretinopathy, thrombosis, and new-onset Graves’ disease.

In a June 2022 paper published in Vaccines, researchers analyzed ocular adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to provide clinicians and researchers with a broader picture of ocular side effects of COVID-19 vaccinations.

VAERS is a voluntary reporting system comanaged by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It is designed to detect vaccine safety signals, although it is estimated to represent less than 1 percent of actual adverse events.

During the analysis period of December 2020 to December 2021, VAERS received 55,313 reports for ocular adverse events, 6,688 of which met the inclusion criteria. Of those reports, 2,229 were related to eyelid swelling, ocular hyperemia, and conjunctivitis, 1,785 were reports of blurred vision, and 1,322 were reports of visual impairment.

Females accounted for 74 percent of the reports, and eye conditions affected primarily individuals between the ages of 40 and 59 who had received either the Johnson & Johnson shot or Moderna’s vaccine.

Of the patients who reported ocular-related complications, 50 percent received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, 38 percent received Moderna, and 12 percent received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

Although the study’s authors said they could not determine whether the vaccines were associated with an increased risk of adverse events, their data suggests a “possible association between COVID-19 vaccines and ocular adverse events.”

“Physicians are cautioned not only to be aware of this potential problem, but to check any underlying patient conditions, and to carefully document in VAERS within a few weeks of vaccination,” they wrote.

According to current VAERS data, 734 cases of uveitis, 539 cases of eye inflammation, 2,781 cases of retina disorders, 11,641 cases of facial nerve disorders, and 3,909 reports of eyelid swelling, ocular hyperaemia, and conjunctivitis were reported following COVID-19 vaccination between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 29.

Potential associations between uveitis and other vaccinations have been reported, including influenza, human papillomavirus, and varicella zoster virus vaccines. However, these studies did not necessarily establish a causal link.

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/study-finds-elevated-risk-eye-inflammatory-disorder-following-covid-19-vaccination

Bio-Techne beats third-quarter estimates on improving demand for biotech products

 Bio-Techne on Wednesday beat third-quarter profit and revenue estimates, helped by better-than-expected demand for its cell and gene therapy products and testing and diagnostic devices.

On an adjusted basis, the company posted a profit of 48 cents per share, beating analysts' estimates of 45 cents per share, according to LSEG data.

"As expected, we experienced subsiding headwinds from de-stocking but also delivered year-over-year growth in a depressed biopharma end market," said CEO Kim Kelderman.

The company said in a conference call in February that the soft funding environment continued to impact China, which contributed to 10% of the company's total revenues in the fiscal year 2023, according to latest regulatory filings.

However, the company added it expects headwinds to be less severe going forward as inflation and interest rates appear to have stabilized in China.

The Minnesota-based company reported third-quarter revenue of $303.4 million, compared with analysts' estimates of $292.2 million.

Sales at its largest protein sciences unit were $214.6 million, a fall of 2% from a year earlier. But it still came ahead of analysts' expectations of $209.7 million.

The unit develops and manufactures biological compounds used for research and diagnostics and to develop cell and gene therapies.

Revenue from its diagnostics and genomics unit, which manufactures tools and compounds used to make therapeutics and vaccines, rose 16% to $87.5 million.

Larger peer Thermo Fisher in its post-earnings conference call said it is seeing continued improvements in biotech funding environment, partly because of a stimulus program announced by China.

Bio-Techne on Monday announced a strategic distribution agreement with Thermo Fisher where Thermo through its European arm will distribute Bio-Techne's extensive portfolio of products to laboratories and research institutions across Europe. 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bio-techne-beats-third-quarter-112941445.html