Risky combinations of psychiatric drugs prescribed for young patients

 A new study reveals that young patients treated with psychiatric medications receive potentially dangerous combinations with concerning frequency.

Researchers from Rutgers Health and other institutions recently analyzed New York State Medicaid records for more than 141,000 patients receiving any psychiatric medication. Nearly 400 of them had received at least one potentially dangerous combination for one month or longer. Doctors refer to these as severe drug-drug interactions, and their use is typically considered "contraindicated" (recommended against).

Senior study author Lawrence Kleinman, professor of pediatrics at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, cautioned that while some children whose illness is resistant to usual treatments may receive more benefit than the risk from the combination, "Good practice demands that patients and caregivers be informed of and assent to risks and benefits, including informing them that the intended pair of medications is typically contraindicated."

The study, published in BMC Primary Care, analyzed 2014 prescription data for New York Medicaid enrollees under 21. While the overall rate of these potentially dangerous combinations is small—about 3 in 1,000 children who filled any mental health medication prescription had at least one month of prescription overlap, and 5 per 1,000 had any overlap—these cases represent significant potential for harm or death. Kleinman noted that New York State Medicaid had previously implemented a program to reduce harmful drug interactions, suggesting numbers might be higher in other populations.

Polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is very common, with nearly 38% of patients in the study filling two or more medications with at least one month overlap, generating more than 11,000 distinct drug combinations.

The study offered some reassurance: The most commonly filled mental health medications were stimulants typically used for conditions such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and these were never combined with other drugs to create severe interaction risks. Most contraindicated combinations involved the antipsychotic drug ziprasidone, which can increase the risk of potentially fatal heart rhythm abnormalities such as QT interval prolongation or serotonin syndrome when paired with certain medications. Kleinman noted, "Because of this risk, the FDA has warned that ziprasidone should not be prescribed with other drugs that have demonstrated QT prolongations."

About 32% (364) of the 1,121 patients prescribed ziprasidone also received a contraindicated partner medication for at least 30 days. It rose to 54% when considering prescription overlap of any duration.

Other common risky combinations involved antidepressants such as fluoxetine (Prozac) and trazodone paired with various antipsychotic medications, risking life-threatening QT interval prolongation and serotonin syndrome.

Researchers analyzed prescription claims data for all New York State Medicaid enrollees younger than 21 in 2014, identifying 84 distinct behavioral and mental health medications. They flagged combinations with severe interactions according to established drug interaction databases.

The team examined different durations for overlapping prescriptions: one day, 15 days, or 30 days. Even at the 30-day threshold, 392 young patients received contraindicated combinations, rising to 651 for any overlap.

Contraindicated combinations were more common in adolescents and young adults than younger children, with no children under 6 receiving risky combinations. While boys were more likely to receive any mental health medication, there was no gender difference in potentially dangerous pair usage.

Of over 20,000 clinicians prescribing psychiatric medications, 386 prescribed at least one contraindicated pair. Most were psychiatrists rather than pediatricians, which Kleinman suggested may be because psychiatrists likely see patients with more severe mental illness.

Kleinman added that insufficient research into treating mental illness in children often left clinicians and families "flying blind."

Among the study's limitations was the age of its data. Prescribing patterns may have changed, especially post-COVID-19. Also, researchers couldn't determine if patients took all medications as prescribed or if prescribers and parents made intentional, informed decisions about risky combinations.

Nevertheless, Kleinman emphasized the need for ongoing monitoring of prescription patterns to prevent potential harm. He suggested health systems and insurers implement systems to flag these rare but concerning cases for review.

"We believe that our data and this methodology could serve as the beginning of such efforts," Kleinman said. "Ultimately, such ongoing monitoring could reduce harmful prescription combinations and medication-related adverse events."

More information: Laura M. Borgelt et al, Prevalence of contraindicated combinations amid behavioral and mental health medications filled in a pediatric population, BMC Primary Care (2024). DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02528-9

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-09-risky-combinations-psychiatric-drugs-young.html

Serotonin's role in resilience

 The simple act of observing others cope with a traumatic experience can increase our capacity for resilience and prevent the pathological states that can result from it, notably depression. Neuroscientists at UNIL have demonstrated the presence of this "emotional contagion" in mice, and successfully deciphered its mechanism.

The neurotransmitter serotonin, released in a brain structure called the habenula, has been shown to be the key to resilience. This discovery, published in Science, revisits the role of serotonin and opens up new perspectives, notably for understanding depression and its treatment.

Human beings have the ability to cope with aversive experiences while continuing to live a normal life. This ability is known as resilience. However, some individuals are more vulnerable to traumatic events. They develop a loss of motivation and drive, which are hallmarks of depression.

Promoting resilience in such people at risk could counter their vulnerability and function as a preventive practice against the possible emergence of a pathological state. But there are still too many unknowns for resilience to be used as a preventive practice.

"There is a lack of clinical tools or underlying mechanisms to promote this type of conditioning capable of fostering a resilient reaction as in healthy people," says Manuel Mameli, Associate Professor at the Department of Fundamental Neurosciences at the Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne (UNIL).

To achieve this, we need to understand the brain function behind adversity—a challenge that Mameli's team has successfully undertaken.

Observing for self-preservation

To explore the underlying brain mechanisms, the UNIL neuroscientists first designed an experimental model capable of promoting resilience and measuring its consequences on the appearance of pathological traits following trauma.

"We started from the recognized fact that simply observing the emotional experiences of others helps us to learn from them. It's a phenomenon known as emotional contagion, and it engages resilience," explains Mameli.

To achieve this, an "observer" mouse was placed close to a mouse subjected to small electric shocks to the paws. This simple task protected the majority of the observer mice from developing pathological states of depression when they were subsequently exposed to this unpleasant experience themselves.

This was not the case for mice who had not witnessed the traumatic experiences of their fellow companions. The scientists concluded that the simple act of observing others cope with a traumatic experience increases one's own capacity for resilience and helps guard against possible pathological consequences.

Serotonin, the resilience molecule

Following the discovery of this behavioral principle, the neuroscientists successfully identified the brain mechanism mediating it. They focused on the habenula, a tiny cerebral structure located at the heart of the brain, known to participate in emotional and sensory processing, and to regulate neurotransmitters associated with depression, notably serotonin.

To achieve this, they specifically developed imaging tools to track this molecule in mice.

"It is very difficult to measure the variation of serotonin in the brain. Thanks to a biosensor developed by Yulong Li of Peking University, co-author of the study, we were able to identify the key mechanism," adds Mameli.

Recordings made during behavioral experiments revealed that emotional contagion coincided with a lasting change in the functioning of neurons in the habenula, together with an increase in serotonin release in this region.

More specifically, according to Sarah Mondoloni, postdoctoral fellow in Mameli's laboratory at UNIL and first investigator of the study, "it is the dynamics of serotonin that change during this task, and this is the key finding of our study."

By artificially altering the dynamics of serotonin levels, the research team was able to demonstrate that its non-increase not only undermines the long-lasting neuronal activity change in the habenula, but also the ability of mice to foster resilience following adversity.

Re-exploring the mechanisms of depression

A common denominator between the mechanism of resilience after adversity discovered in this study and that of depression is serotonin. Many antidepressants target serotonin to increase its concentration in the brain. Here, neuroscientists show that a transient, localized increase in the habenula can prevent the onset of apathetic behavior following a traumatic experience.

"This property of the serotonergic system is exciting information for neuroscientists. But our discovery could also pave the way for new therapeutic applications relevant to depression, for example by testing existing pharmacological serotonin activators, including psychedelic therapies that stimulate the serotonin system. Their use could be refined to achieve better therapeutic approaches," concludes Mameli.

More information: Sarah Mondoloni et al, Serotonin release in habenula during emotional contagion promotes resilience, Science (2024). DOI: 10.1126/science.adp3897. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adp3897

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-09-neuroscientists-uncover-serotonin-role-resilience.html

'Extortion common experience among migrants traveling to US'

 Latinx immigrant adults traveling to the United States are extorted—on average—$804 per research participant throughout the journey, according to a study appearing in Injury Epidemiology.

"This study is rooted in research into newly arrived immigrant exposure to trauma, using an adapted version of the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire to gauge the various traumas encountered throughout migration," says Laura Vargas, Ph.D., assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and corresponding author. "So many respondents answered with various instances of extortion that we needed to study this experience on its own."

Researchers spoke with 85 new immigrants arriving at the southern U.S. border with Mexico in Texas, asking if they were extorted, by what type of person, where it happened and for how much money.

The study finds that the most common perpetrators were police officers (80.6%) and immigration officials (37.3%), followed by narcotraffickers or gangs (25.4%) and the military (20.9%). Most extortion experiences occurred in Mexico (77.6%) and Guatemala (67.2%), followed by other transit countries such as Colombia (22.4%) and Nicaragua (20.9%). Using a conversion rate to U.S. dollars, experts found that the average rate of money taken from migrants is $804, and adults traveling with children were more likely to be extorted.

Additionally, survey responses indicate significantly higher rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared to those who were not extorted, but no significant difference in rates of depression or anxiety. Researchers say extortion should be considered an extreme stressor, and study results can help better inform mental health treatment for newly arrived immigrants.

"Extortion is hard for Americans to conceptualize, but it's common in Latin America—it's almost a part of life, albeit a very traumatic one," says Vargas.

"It's important to shed light on it and understand it from their lived experience. And even though we have a small sample here, a vast majority of respondents experienced extortion; ultimately, we clinicians need to think very actively about how to engage with new immigrant populations through the lens of traumatization that may differ from what we observe here in the U.S., aiming to care for the various health effects that stem from PTSD and allow newly arrived immigrants a chance at a dignified life."

More information: Laura Vargas et al, Extortion experiences of recent adult immigrants from Latin America: self-reported prevalence, associated costs, and current mental health, Injury Epidemiology (2024). DOI: 10.1186/s40621-024-00524-2

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-09-extortion-common-latinx-immigrants.html

Post-X Ban, Beware the Brazilian Model of Institutional Mistrust

 As democracies grapple with misinformation, Brazil’s hardline approach is seen by some as a potential model. The country has taken extreme measures to police online discourse – recently banning X (formerly Twitter) and fining citizens using VPNs to access it. These moves highlight its boldness but also underscore the dangers of empowering the state to treat mistrust as merely a crisis of information.

Brazil’s crisis of institutional mistrust can be traced back to the “Car Wash” operation, a sweeping corruption investigation that began in 2014. Car Wash revealed deep entanglements of bribery within the highest echelons of the government during the Lula administration in the early 2000s. The judiciary, seen as the last bastion of integrity, gained unprecedented public trust, with judges and prosecutors becoming national heroes.

However, as Car Wash extended its reach, the judiciary itself came under scrutiny. In 2019, the magazine Crusoe published allegations implicating Supreme Court Justice Dias Toffoli in the very corruption schemes Car Wash aimed to dismantle. Toffoli’s response – to launch an investigation against the magazine for allegedly spreading fake news – marked the beginning of a dangerous conflation of misinformation and dissent.

Appointed to lead this campaign was Alexandre de Moraes, another Supreme Court Justice, whose actions would push the boundaries of judicial power in Brazil. Moraes used his role to clamp down on misinformation, a term that increasingly became a catch-all for any speech critical of the government or judiciary. Under the banner of defending democracy, Moraes initiated a series of measures that would culminate in the digital censorship we see today.

Initially, the press decried this move as censorship. However, as concerns about misinformation grew and Moraes began targeting supporters of then-President Jair Bolsonaro – who were increasingly skeptical of Brazilian democracy – the initiative gained support among Brazil’s elite. This signaled a critical shift: The judiciary was now positioning itself not just as an arbiter of law but as the arbiter of truth.

Moraes’ approach has been defined by his willingness to bypass due process in the name of combating misinformation and anti-democratic opinions. The crackdown led by Moraes’ courts on perceived threats has included jailing individuals without a fair trial for social media posts, suspending social media accounts without explanation, freezing assets for private conversations deemed anti-democratic, and even suspending elected officials from office. These actions were often carried out with minimal transparency and no avenue for appeal.

The escalation of judicial overreach peaked in recent days, when Moraes ordered a ban on X in Brazil. In the preceding months, under Elon Musk’s ownership, the platform had refused to comply with demands to ban accounts and remove content, even exposing these censorship orders. Facing the threat of legal action and the arrest of its staff, X fired its employees in Brazil and ceased operations, leading Moraes to take even more extreme measures. He froze the assets of Twitter’s former legal representative and extended this to Starlink – a move widely criticized as a violation of Brazilian corporate law. Finally, Moraes banned X, cutting off more than 20 million citizens from the platform. He also imposed a daily fine of 50,000 Brazilian reais (about $9,000) on any citizen using a VPN to access it, an amount exceeding the annual income of most Brazilians, effectively criminalizing attempts to access information.

And yet, did repression actually help solve a crisis of institutional mistrust? The evidence suggests otherwise. Recent polls show alarmingly low levels of trust in key institutions, with only 23% of Brazilians expressing strong trust in electoral courts and a mere 15% in the Supreme Court. Paradoxically, political figures often labeled as sources of “misinformation” by the judiciary have gained popularity, with one such candidate leading in the race for mayor of São Paulo.

Mistrust is not misinformation, but it is often its cause. Treating a crisis of institutional trust solely as an information problem overlooks the deeper societal fractures and risks intensifying the very tensions it seeks to resolve. Authoritarian information control erodes democratic norms and further diminishes public confidence.

Ironically, the very platform targeted in Brazil’s crackdown – X – offers a glimpse of a possible alternative approach to addressing misinformation. Its Community Notes feature allows users to collaboratively fact-check and provide context to contentious content, a decentralized approach also envisioned by other platforms such as Ethereum.

Whether decentralized technologies point to a promising future or not, the path to restoring trust in institutions lies not in censorship or judicial overreach, but in embracing transparency, accountability, and a renewed commitment to the principles of free and open discourse.

Let Brazil’s experience be a reminder that trust cannot be mandated from above. Only a culture of open dialogue and collective problem-solving can help democracies build a more resilient and trustworthy public sphere – one that strengthens rather than undermines the foundation of a free society.

A native Brazilian, Diogo Costa is president of the Foundation for Economic Education.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/09/05/post-x_ban_beware_brazilian_model_institutional_mistrust_151565.html

Shellenberger: Democrats Are Running On A Russian Hoax For A Third Time

 Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger reacts to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray's joint press conference on Russian interference in the 2024 election. Shellenberger said the Department of Justice is using the weaponization of the government to influence the election and that "all of the discredited characters" are involved.

"The idea that Trump and MAGA Republicans are controlled by Russia is the craziest conspiracy theory of them all. But apparently it works with some people or it's the best they've got," Shellenberger concluded.

MICHAEL SHELLENBERGER: That's a great question. If you actually believe everything in the indictment, and I read every word of it just now, this is really small ball stuff, there's no evidence that any Russian money changed anybody's opinion. They say in the indictment that two of the influencers that were targeted did not know that it was Russian money. There's no evidence that really there was any serious amount of media coverage to influence anything measurable in terms of opinion. All that being said, the main issue here is that we have this continued -- this record of the Department of Justice running Russian disinformation hoaxes twice, not once. The first time claiming that the Russians favored Trump when we now know that they favored Clinton, and then the second time, the Hunter Biden laptop where we now know that the FBI ran a disinformation effort to make people think that it was about the Russians. So nobody should trust blindly the Department of Justice when it says anything about Russia.

JESSE WATTERS: So now we have the United States government interfering and three elections in a row, 16, 20 and 24, on behalf of Democrat candidates, weak Democrat candidates, Hillary, Biden and Harris. What does it say about the Harris campaign that they need to do this right now?

SHELLENBERGER: Yeah, I mean look, I think it's -- this is the best they've got. I think that says something, that they are having to do this. Like you said, it's all of the discredited characters with all of the discredited messages from the past. So it's not going to -- I mean it's clearly not going to have much impact at all. You know, I think there is some reason for concern which is that it feels like it's another effort to program people, if we use the crude word, brainwashed people and get them to stop thinking about these issues. So we should always be concerned when we see situations where there may be the weaponization of the government going on in order to, in this case, because it's always projection, influence the elections. The timing alone is curious.

WATTERS: You can't have the FBI, and this is probably CIA laundered, and the Department of Justice spilling this out through press conferences and through leaks to mainstream media reporters on the eve of an election and then have a 24-hour, maybe 48 hour news cycle on CNN, MSNBC, and it's just going to wash over the people, even the casual viewers that are just looking around. That does have an impact. That is more election skulduggery than what the Russians are doing.

SHELLENBERGER: Yeah, and I would say too, I think it's important why they keep focusing on Russia, it's clearly an effort to undermine the nationalist and populist appeal of Trump and the MAGA Republicans. They are trying to say that they are not authentically supported in the United States, they are not about America First, they are secretly, I mean it's a conspiracy theory, the idea that Trump and MAGA Republicans are controlled by Russia is the craziest conspiracy theory of them all. But apparently it works with some people or it's the best
they've got.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/09/05/shellenberger_democrats_are_running_on_a_russian_hoax_for_a_third_time_another_attempt_to_brainwash_people.html 

Parallel US Regime Change Operations Likely Occurred In Pakistan & Bangladesh

 by Jeffrey D. Sachs via Common Dreams,

Two former leaders of major South Asian countries have reportedly accused the United States of covert regime change operations to topple their governments. One of the leaders, former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, languishes in prison, on a perverse conviction that proves Khan’s assertion. The other leader, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheik Hasina, fled to India following a violent coup in her country. Their grave accusations against the U.S., as reported in the world media, should be investigated by the UN, since if true, the U.S. actions would constitute a fundamental threat to world peace and to regional stability in South Asia. The two cases seem to be very similar. The very strong evidence of the U.S. role in toppling the government of Imran Khan raises the likelihood that something similar may have occurred in Bangladesh.

In the case of Pakistan, Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and Central Asia, met with Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the U.S., on March 7, 2022. Ambassador Khan immediately wrote back to his capital, conveying Lu’s warning that PM Khan threatened U.S.-Pakistan relations because of Khan’s "aggressively neutral position" regarding Russia and Ukraine.

The Ambassador’s March 7 note (technically a diplomatic cypher) quoted Assistant Secretary Lu as follows: "I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead." The very next day, members of the parliament took procedural steps to oust PM Khan.

On March 27, PM Khan brandished the cypher, and told his followers and the public that the U.S. was out to bring him down. On April 10, PM Khan was thrown out of office as the parliament acceded to the U.S. threat.

We know this in detail because of Ambassador Khan’s cypher, exposed by PM Khan and brilliantly documented by Ryan Grim of The Intercept, including the text of the cypher. Absurdly and tragically, PM Khan languishes in prison in part over espionage charges, linked to his revealing the cypher.

The U.S. appears to have played a similar role in the recent violent coup in Bangladesh. PM Hasina was ostensibly toppled by student unrest, and fled to India when the Bangladeshi military refused to prevent the protestors from storming the government offices. Yet there may well be much more to the story than meets the eye.

According to press reports in India, PM Hasina is claiming that the U.S. brought her down. Specifically, she says that the U.S. removed her from power because she refused to grant the U.S. military facilities in a region that is considered strategic for the U.S. in its "Indo-Pacific Strategy" to contain China. While these are second-hand accounts by the Indian media, they track closely several speeches and statements that Hasina has made over the past two years.

On May 17, 2024, the same Assistant Secretary Liu who played a lead role in toppling PM Khan, visited Dhaka to discuss the US Indo-Pacific Strategy among other topics. Days later, Sheikh Hasina reportedly summoned the leaders of the 14 parties of her alliance to make the startling claim that a "country of white-skinned people" was trying to bring her down, ostensibly telling the leaders that she refused to compromise her nation’s sovereignty. Like Imran Khan, PM Hasina had been pursuing a foreign policy of neutrality, including constructive relations not only with the U.S. but also with China and Russia, much to the deep consternation of the U.S. government.

To add credence to Hasina’s charges, Bangladesh had delayed signing two military agreements that the U.S. had pushed very hard since 2022, indeed by none other than the former Under-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, the neocon hardliner with her own storied history of U.S. regime-change operations. One of the draft agreements, the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA), would bind Bangladesh to closer military-to-military cooperation with Washington. The Government of PM Hasina was clearly not enthusiastic to sign it.

The U.S. is by far the world’s leading practitioner of regime-change operations, yet the U.S. flatly denies its role in covert regime change operations even when caught red-handed, as with Nuland’s infamous intercepted phone call in late January 2014 planning the U.S.-led regime change operation in Ukraine. It is useless to appeal to the U.S. Congress, and still less the executive branch, to investigate the claims by PM Khan and PM Hasina. Whatever the truth of the matter, they will deny and lie as necessary.

This is where the UN should step in. Covert regime change operations are blatantly illegal under international law (notably the Doctrine of Non-Intervention, as expressed for example in UN General Assembly Resolution 2625, 1970), and constitute perhaps the greatest threat to world peace, as they profoundly destabilize nations, and often lead to wars and other civil disorders. The UN should investigate and expose covert regime change operations, both in the interests of reversing them, and preventing them in the future.

The UN Security Council is of course specifically charged under Article 24 of the UN Charter with "primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security." When evidence arises that a government has been toppled through the intervention or complicity of a foreign government, the UN Security Council should investigate the claims.

AFP: Anti-government protestors display Bangladesh’s national flag as they storm Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s palace in Dhaka on August 5, 2024.

In the cases of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the UN Security Council should seek the direct testimony of PM Khan and PM Hasina in order to evaluate the evidence that the U.S. played a role in the overthrow of the governments of these two leaders. Each, of course, should be protected by the UN for giving their testimony, so as to protect them from any retribution that could follow their honest presentation of the facts. Their testimony can be taken by video conference, if necessary, given the tragic ongoing incarceration of PM Khan.

The U.S. might well exercise its veto in the UN Security Council to prevent such a investigation. In that case, the UN General Assembly can take up the matter, under UN Resolution A/RES/76/, which allows the UN General Assembly to consider an issue blocked by veto in the UN Security Council. The issues at stake could then be assessed by the entire membership of the UN. The veracity of the U.S. involvement in the recent regime changes in Pakistan and Bangladesh could then be objectively analyzed and judged on the evidence, rather than on mere assertions and denials.

The U.S. engaged in at least 64 covert regime change operations during 1947-1989, according to documented research by Lindsey O’Rourke, political science professor at Boston Collage, and several more that were overt (e.g. by U.S.-led war). It continues to engage in regime-change operations with shocking frequency to this day, toppling governments in all parts of the world. It is wishful thinking that the U.S. will abide by international law on its own, but it is not wishful thinking for the world community, long suffering from U.S. regime change operations, to demand their end at the United Nations.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/parallel-us-regime-change-operations-likely-occurred-pakistan-bangladesh

It's Spreading: America's Top Oil Field Terrorized By Armed Venezuelan Gangs

 It's only going to get worse from here, as the Biden-Harris administration's disastrous open border policies have now come to a 'neighborhood near you' (for some of you). In the past week, we saw armed Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua members terrorize the northern Denver suburb of Aurora and other sanctuary cities run by far-left Democrats. New concerns out Thursday afternoon indicate critical infrastructure is now under threat from migrant cartel members. 

According to Libs of TikTok, a Texas-based oil/gas company issued a memo to employees informing them that police and the FBI have warned armed Cuba and Venezuela migrant gangs are committing thefts in the Permian Basin (America's highest producing oil field). 

Here's the memo:

Industry peers and law enforcement in West Texas (WTX) are aware of a recent increase in organized criminal activity inclusive of violent crimes, gang activity and oil field thefts in and around WTX operational areas. Specifically, regional law enforcement and the FBI advised that gang members emanating from Cuba and Venezuela are organizing and working in concert to commit thefts within the Permian Basin. These individuals and groups are armed, violent in nature and will not hesitate to use force.

Crimes associated with these groups include the theft of oil, diesel fuel, copper wire, and catalyst elements. Recent incidents have also included two assaults by water haulers who were attempting to steal oil from WTX oilfield sites. After the thieves were observed by witnesses who drove up to investigate, the thieves attempted to use their vehicles to run the witnesses off the road. In another incident, a thief, acting as a spotter and following a water hauler who had stolen oil, also attempted to run a witness off the road. There have been numerous reports of second vehicles acting as spotters for water haulers committing oil thefts.

An industry peer provided the below snapshot of a video surveillance of an armed thief checking out an area before stealing diesel from the location.

Screenshot, Libs of TikTok

We highlighted earlier this week that law-abiding Americans must be made well aware of the cities, counties, and states that have laws, ordinances, and policies that obstruct immigration enforcement and shield illegal alien criminals from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This is because these areas are increasingly becoming dangerous, with migrant criminals running amok. Aurora is a prime example. 

This is why.

Armed illegal alien gangs are now posing a threat to critical energy infrastructure in the Permian Basin. The nation is sleepwalking into a disaster.

Why isn't this considered a national security threat by the current administration? Of course it's because they caused it - plus, it's an election year.

https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/its-spreading-americas-top-oil-field-terrorized-armed-venezuela-gangs