'In apparent blow to Biden plan, Hamas leader demands full end to Gaza war'

 The leader of Hamas said on Wednesday the group would demand a permanent end to the war in Gaza and Israeli withdrawal as part of a ceasefire plan, dealing an apparent blow to a truce proposal touted last week by U.S. President Joe Biden.

Israel, meanwhile, said there would be no halt to fighting during ceasefire talks, and launched a new assault on a central section of the Gaza Strip near the last city yet to be stormed by its tanks.

The remarks by Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh appeared to deliver the Palestinian militant group's reply to the proposal that Biden unveiled last week. Washington had said it was waiting to hear an answer from Hamas to what Biden described as an Israeli initiative.

"The movement and factions of the resistance will deal seriously and positively with any agreement that is based on a comprehensive ending of the aggression and the complete withdrawal and prisoners swap,” Haniyeh said.

Asked whether Haniyeh's remarks amounted to the group's reply to Biden, a senior Hamas official replied to a text message from Reuters with a "thumbs up" emoji.

Washington is still pressing hard to reach an agreement. CIA director William Burns met senior officials from mediators Qatar and Egypt on Wednesday in Doha to discuss the ceasefire proposal.

Since a brief week-long truce in November, all attempts to arrange a ceasefire have failed, with Hamas insisting on its demand for a permanent end to the conflict, while Israel says it is prepared to discuss only temporary pauses until the militant group is defeated.

Biden has repeatedly declared that ceasefires were close over the past several months, only for no truce to materialise. Notably, in February Biden said Israel had agreed to a ceasefire by the start of the Ramadan Muslim holy month on March 10, a deadline which passed with military operations in full swing.

But last week's announcement came with far greater fanfare from the White House, and at a time when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is under mounting domestic political pressure to chart a path to end the eight-month-old war and negotiate the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

Three U.S. officials told Reuters Biden, having obtained Israel's agreement for the proposal, had deliberately announced it without warning the Israelis he would do so, to narrow the room for Netanyahu to back away.

"We didn't ask permission to announce the proposal," said a senior U.S. official granted anonymity to speak freely about the negotiations. "We informed the Israelis we were going to give a speech on the situation in Gaza. We did not go into great detail about what it was."

Hamas, who rule Gaza, precipitated the war by attacking Israeli territory on Oct. 7, killing around 1,200 people and capturing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Around half of the hostages were freed in the war's only truce so far, which lasted a week in November.

Israel's military assault on Gaza has killed more than 36,000 people, according to health officials in the territory, who say thousands more dead are feared buried under the rubble.

ISRAEL LUKEWARM

Although Biden described the ceasefire proposal as an Israeli offer, Israel's government has been lukewarm in public. A top Netanyahu aide confirmed on Sunday Israel had made the proposal even though it was "not a good deal".

The full details have not been published, but Israel insists that it would not sign up to any proposal that requires it to halt the war before Hamas is completely destroyed. The militants, meanwhile, have shown no sign of surrender and their main leaders are still at large.

"The outline allows Israel to realise all of the objectives: to destroy Hamas militarily and its governing capabilities, to bring home our hostages, and ensure that Gaza can never form a threat to us again," Israeli government spokesman David Mencer said on Wednesday of the ceasefire proposal.

Far-right members of Netanyahu's government have pledged to quit if he agrees to a peace deal that leaves Hamas in place, a move that could force a new election and end the political career of Israel's longest-serving leader. Centrist opponents who joined Netanyahu's war cabinet in a show of unity at the outset of the conflict have also threatened to quit, saying his government has no plan.

NEW ASSAULT IN CENTRAL GAZA

Meanwhile, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said there would be no let-up in Israel's offensive while negotiations over the ceasefire proposal were under way.

"Any negotiations with Hamas would be conducted only under fire," Gallant said in remarks carried by Israeli media after he flew aboard a warplane to inspect the Gaza front.

Israel announced a new operation against Hamas in central Gaza on Wednesday, where Palestinian medics said airstrikes had killed dozens of people.

The armed wings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad said they had fought gun battles with Israeli forces in areas throughout the enclave and fired anti-tank rockets and shells.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/israel-steps-military-offensive-gaza-090521843.html

Companies to Watch for Potential M&As in 2024

 This year has seen a boom in biopharma mergers and acquisitions, with six acquisitions over a billion dollars so far. In light of the massive revenues pharma companies are generating in the obesity space and the pressure many companies are under from looming loss of exclusivity (LOE) on top drugs, analysts don’t see it slowing down anytime soon.

“We have a lot of pressure from LOE, which essentially kind of forces us to go out and buy new assets,” said Christiana Bardon, co-managing partner at MPM BioImpact.

Analysts predict there will be more than $40 billion in annual revenue at risk due to pharma LOE over the next five years, affecting key drugs owned by almost all of the big players, she said. In addition to that, in Bardon’s view several biotechs have achieved a level of success needed to graduate from startups to the prime time category, meaning they have the financial heft to begin making acquisitions of their own.

The Graduates:

Vertex Pharmaceuticals

From a cash flow perspective, Vertex is very capable of buying other companies, with over $114 billion in revenue and upward of $10 billion in cash, Bardon said.

Indeed, on May 20 Vertex completed a $4.9 billion acquisition of Alpine, adding to the 10 other deals the company closed in 2023 that fit its corporate and R&D strategy, a spokesperson for the company told BioSpace. The acquisition includes Alpine’s lead asset, povetacicept, a dual antagonist of the BAFF and APRIL cytokines used to treat autoimmune and inflammatory diseases.

“We’re particularly excited about the Alpine transaction because we believe strongly that Vertex’s capabilities will accelerate povetacicept’s development and bring this potential best-in-class medicine to patients faster, while adding important protein engineering and immunotherapy expertise to Vertex’s toolbox,” the spokesperson said in an email.

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

Regeneron is now a $109 billion company, in a similar league to Vertex, but with even more cash: $17 billion, and only $2.7 billion of debt, Bardon said.

“If you look at that market cap, even relative to basically all of the other pharmas, they are now bigger than Bristol-Myers Squibb and GSK,” Bardon said. Those companies have market caps of $83.6 billion and $93.6 billion respectively.

“We are interested in select collaborations or acquisitions that complement our existing portfolio,” Nouhad Husseini, senior vice president of business development and corporate strategy at Regeneron, told BioSpace in an email. “We look for companies and collaborators who can enhance or expand upon Regeneron’s extensive in-house capabilities, strengthening our collective ability to address serious diseases.”

The company’s most recent acquisition, of 2seventy Bio, was completed April 1, giving Regeneron all of 2seventy’s oncology and autoimmune preclinical and clinical-stage cell therapy pipelines. In 2023, Regeneron also acquired Decibel Therapeutics, strengthening the company’s gene therapy programs.

“Investing in innovation remains our top capital allocation priority,” Christopher Fenimore, senior vice president of finance and chief financial officer of Regeneron, said in a Q1 earnings press release.

Specialty:

Biogen

At $33 billion, Biogen is a smaller company, Bardon said, “but they obviously generate a lot of cash flow.” Their strategy is more targeted than that of larger competitors, primarily focused on neurology, she said. But recent acquisitions might indicate the company is branching out of that specialty.

Expanding from neurology into immunology, the company announced its most recent acquisition of HI-Bio for $1.15 billion on May 22. HI-Bio’s lead asset is felzartamab, an investigational anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody entering Phase III studies for both primary membranous nephropathy and antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplant recipients.

“We believe this late-stage asset … is a strategic addition to the Biogen portfolio as we continue to augment our pipeline and build on our expertise in immunology,” said Biogen head of development Priya Singhal in a statement.

To Watch:

Moderna

Moderna is sitting on a sizable amount of cash generated from the COVID-19 vaccine, Bardon said. It’s a $55 billion company with over $8 billion in hand.

“There’s a little bit more insecurity around that because of the volatility associated with the COVID vaccine,” she said. “I think they would love to diversify their business . . . especially in areas pertaining to new mRNA technologies.”

Cancer vaccines could be a logical area to expand in, since the company is already finding success with its experimental mRNA vaccine in patients with high-risk melanoma.

https://www.biospace.com/article/companies-to-watch-for-potential-m-and-as-in-2024/

Biden Campaign Falsely Accuses Fox's John Roberts Of Lying About Insulin Caps

 by Jonathan Turley,

Winston Churchill once said that “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

It often seems like the Biden White House and campaign has embraced that warning as an operating principle.

The most recent target was the veteran Fox news anchor John Roberts, who was accused of airing “a blatant lie” in questioning Biden’s claim that he was the first president to push through a cap of $35 on insulin treatments. Roberts was entirely correct, but the campaign has still not removed the false attack on his integrity and accuracy.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a legal analyst for Fox News and I have known Roberts for decades. There is no one who I hold in higher regard for his integrity or his intellect than John Roberts. We have known and worked with each other at different networks through the years. Roberts is an old-school journalist with impeccable credentials.

Yesterday, the Biden campaign launched the attack on Roberts for his questioning of the claim of President Joe Biden that he solely secured the insulin cap. Roberts remarked that he had a recollection that it was former President Donald Trump who pushed the cap.

“I seem to remember that back in May of 2020, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid said that President Trump had signed an executive order to cap the price of insulin for Medicare recipients at 35 bucks. Now, maybe I’m misremembering that, but I think it kind of already happened.”

The Biden campaign then called it “a blatant lie” in a posting on X that has reached over a million people.

Contrary to the Biden campaign’s claims, Roberts’s recollection was entirely correct. Under the Trump Administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced in May 2020 that the Part D Senior Savings Model participating plans would cap insulin copays to $35 per month’s supply, and over 1,750 Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D plans applied to offer lower insulin costs.

Trump praised the new policy, which was widely covered by the press.

There was a Rose Garden event where Trump was praised for his actions:

Trump later, in July 2020, signed four executive orders aimed at lowering the cost of insulin. That included Executive Order 13937, which required Federally Qualified Health Centers to pass 340B discounts on to patients. Notably, Biden later reversed Executive Order 13937 before those cost-saving measures could take effect.

This is obviously not the first false statement from the President. However, it is notable that his campaign spread obvious disinformation that was picked up by over a million people but then declined to take down the false claim. The campaign is now in a worse position. To take down the posting is to acknowledge not just that it has lied about Roberts, but that the President lied in taking sole credit for this cap.

This is the same administration supporting the banning, blacklisting, and throttling of those responsible for disinformation. I would not support such censorship of the campaign. This and other columns refuting the false account is sufficient to combat a “blatant lie” by the Biden campaign. Whether it is his uncle being eaten by cannibals or insulin caps, free speech can correct false claims without government regulation. However, President Biden and his administration continue to push for censorship of others accused for false or misleading statements.

The fact that John Roberts was right is hardly surprising. However, there remains a “blatant lie” on the Biden campaign’s social media that must still be corrected.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/blatant-lie-biden-campaign-falsely-accuses-foxs-john-roberts-lying-about-insulin-caps

WHO Confirms Bird Flu Death In Mexico As 'Trust The Science' 'Experts' Want To Test 40M US Cows

 The World Health Organization confirmed the first human death linked to avian influenza in Mexico, involving a 59-year-old with no prior history of handling poultry or other animals. This comes as bird flu has been spreading across North America and other regions of the world, infecting various types of animals and humans. 

"On 23 May 2024, the Mexico International Health Regulations (IHR) National Focal Point (NFP) reported to PAHO/WHO a confirmed fatal case of human infection with avian influenza A(H5N2) virus detected in a resident of the State of Mexico who was hospitalized in Mexico City.

"This is the first laboratory-confirmed human case of infection with an influenza A(H5N2) virus reported globally and the first avian H5 virus infection in a person reported in Mexico. Although the source of exposure to the virus in this case is currently unknown, A(H5N2) viruses have been reported in poultry in Mexico. According to the IHR (2005), a human infection caused by a novel influenza A virus subtype is an event that has the potential for high public health impact and must be notified to the WHO. Based on available information, WHO assesses the current risk to the general population posed by this virus as low." -WHO 

The WHO's statement continued: 

"... confirmed case of human infection with avian influenza A(H5N2) virus detected in a 59-year-old resident of the State of Mexico who was hospitalized in Mexico City and had no history of exposure to poultry or other animals. The case had multiple underlying medical conditions. The case's relatives reported that the case had already been bedridden for three weeks, for other reasons, prior to the onset of acute symptoms." 

Earlier Wednesday, Dutch virologist Dr. Marion Koopmans wrote on X, "The expanding list of wild mammals affected by the (global) epizootic of highly pathogenic avian influenza. This data is for the US. Adding mice to the list (the blue circle in New Mexico)." 

Koopmans also published a USDA map showing bird flu detections in an ever-expanding list of mammals. 

STAT News recently spoke with Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, a leading expert on the bird flu, who provided some insight into the outbreak:

"You have massive outbreaks in wild birds. It spreads over into poultry quite easily. But in humans we see lower numbers, and that to me suggests that the zoonotic risk has decreased." 

Meanwhile, Nita Madhav, a former US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researcher who is now senior director of epidemiology and modeling at Ginkgo Biosecurity, warned Scientific American, "The more it spreads within mammals, that gives it more chances to mutate. As it mutates, as it changes, there is a greater chance it can infect humans. If it gains the ability to spread efficiently from person to person, then it would be hard to stop." 

About a week ago, news broke the Biden Administration was nearing a deal to bankroll Moderna's vaccine against bird flu. 

Remember Deborah Birx, a physician who served as former President Trump's Covid response coordinator? Well, she said earlier today about weekly testing of the nation's cattle herd population. 

"We should be testing every cow weekly," Birx said, adding, "We could be pool testing every dairy worker."

Jordan Schachtel notes... 

The WHO's chief scientist, Jeremy Farrar, has recently said the bird flu amongst cows "is very concerning." 

In recent notes, we penned "The Escalating Threat Of Avian Influenza H5N1 And The Ethical Quandary Of Gain-of-Function Research" and "Former CDC Director Sounds Alarm Over Bird Flu Experiments."

The question arises: if human-to-human cases surge and it's clear that the WHO's focus for this pandemic is cows, what actions will the government be forced to take regarding these animals? However, don't worry—if cows are culled to save the planet from bird flu, Bill Gates will be ready to offer cricket burgers and fake meat New York strips.

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/who-confirms-bird-flu-death-mexico-trust-science-experts-want-test-americas-40-million-cows

Hey Joe Biden, how many EV charging stations have you built? 3 lessons from this monumental screwup

The Biden administration has spent tens of billions of dollars on green energy, yet last year the U.S. and the world used record amounts of fossil fuels.

That would seem to be prima facie evidence that this "great transition" to renewable energy has so far been an expensive policy belly flop.

The evidence is everywhere. Americans aren't buying electric vehicles any more than they were before President Joe Biden was elected. Even with record federal subsidies, car companies are losing billions of dollars making EVs that people don't want. Wind and solar still account for less than 10% of American energy, and across the country hundreds of communities are saying "not in my backyard" to ugly, spacious solar and wind farms. And of course, electric bills and gas prices at the pump are 30% to 50% higher, even though we were promised the green revolution would save us money.

A case in point is the scandalous mismanagement of green energy implementation. Consider the $7.5 billion federal program stuck inside the 2021 infrastructure bill -- a law that Biden touts as one of his great achievements. That bill promised half a million EV charging stations installed all over the country.

Instead, there has been a grand total of -- drum roll, please -- "seven or eight installed." To be fair, that was through last month. They might be up to nine now.

When Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was confronted recently on CBS's "Face the Nation" about what happened with all the money, he hemmed and hawed and replied: "In order to do a charger, it's more than just plunking a small device into the ground. There's utility work, and this is also, really, a new category of federal investment."

Uh huh! Sure. Installing an electric charger for a Tesla in your garage is very complicated business. It's like trying to build the Taj Mahal (which may not have cost $7.5 billion).

Here's another mystery. Why can't Secretary Pete give us an exact count on the progress when the number is small enough to use his fingers? At this pace, they may get 500 built by 2030 -- not the 500,000 promised.

Thank God our celebrated transportation secretary, renowned for riding his bike to his Washington office, wasn't in charge of the Normandy landing.

Then there is the question of where the $7.5 billion of taxpayer money has actually gone. At the current production rate, the final program's price could inflate to more than $1 trillion.

If Donald Trump were president, he'd have long ago summoned Mayor Pete to the Oval Office and greeted him with those two words that made him famous: "YOU'RE FIRED."

Instead, many Democrats are quietly talking about throwing Biden off the ticket, and one of the frontrunners to take his place is none other than the highly accomplished Buttigieg.

But there are some serious lessons to be learned from this monumental screwup.

First, though Biden loves to chat up how much money the government is "investing," where are the signs that any of these borrowed trillions of dollars have improved our lives? This EV charger scandal is just another reminder that the government generally doesn't "invest" tax dollars -- it mostly wastes them.

Second, competence matters. At the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, we released a study finding that more than 90% of Biden's top economic and finance team has NO experience running a business. We have an energy secretary who knows nothing about energy and a transportation secretary who knows nothing about transportation. They are lawyers, academics, politicians or government employees.

Finally, why do we need the government to build EV charging stations? One hundred years ago, the government didn't build gas stations. They just magically sprouted up all over the roads that criss-cross America, because entrepreneurs responded to the demand. Two or three brothers would scrap together some cash, buy a small plot of land on I-66, build a service station with four to eight hoses connected to a tank, put up a tall sign posting the gas price, and drivers would pull in and fill 'er up.

All this "infrastructure" without a single penny or instruction manual from Washington.

Can you imagine if Biden had been president in the 1920s and proclaimed the government would build 500,000 gas stations? They still wouldn't be built, and we'd all be waiting in long lines.

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a co-founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity. His latest book is "Govzilla: How the Relentless Growth of Government Is Devouring Our Economy."

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/hey-joe-biden-how-many-ev-charging-stations-have-you-built-3-lessons-from-monumental-screwup

Home Dialysis Can Cut Cardiovascular Risk

 New data on clazakizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6), and home hemodialysis suggest the potential of two ways to reduce the high risk for cardiovascular events in people receiving dialysis, according to presentations at the 61st European Renal Association Congress.

In one study, researchers found important reductions in inflammatory markers of cardiovascular events in people with end-stage kidney disease undergoing dialysis. A separate analysis showed a lower cardiovascular risk with home hemodialysis vs peritoneal dialysis. 

Another study, also presented at the meeting,  found significantly lower rates of cardiovascular events in patients with end-stage kidney disease treated with home hemodialysis compared with those receiving peritoneal dialysis. 

The study included 68,645 patients identified in the United States Renal Data System and linked Medicare claims between 2005 and 2018.

With a mean follow-up of 1.8 years, home hemodialysis was associated with a slightly lower adjusted risk for cardiovascular events than peritoneal dialysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92). However, the home hemodialysis patients had as much as a 42% lower adjusted risk for stroke (HR, 0.58), and a 17% lower adjusted risk for acute coronary syndrome (HR, 0.83) vs those receiving peritoneal dialysis, with no statistically significant difference in risk for heart failure (HR, 1.05). 

In terms of mortality, home hemodialysis was meanwhile associated with 22% lower adjusted risk for cardiovascular death (HR, 0.78) and 8% lower adjusted risk for all-cause death (HR, 0.92) compared with peritoneal dialysis. 

"Previous studies showed a lower rate of cardiovascular hospitalizations with home hemodialysis; however, no study has specifically examined cardiovascular events," Shah said, adding that further studies also need to compare outcomes by home dialysis modalities.

Key factors, including the frequency of dialysis, could explain the differences, she explained.

"We believe home hemodialysis patients receive more frequent and longer dialysis than peritoneal dialysis, which results in better solute clearance and better volume removal, therefore resulting in better control of parameters associated with bone and mineral metabolism and reduction in left ventricular volume and mass," Shah said.

"This eventually lowers the risk of cardiovascular events and overall cardiovascular death," she said. 

"Clinicians should use this information in shared decision-making and counseling of patients with kidney disease." 

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/how-can-cardiovascular-risk-be-reduced-kidney-dialysis-2024a1000aks