Search This Blog

Tuesday, May 6, 2025

Chinese influence is leaving California dangerously exposed

 Recent revelations that the University of California received massive donations from organisations linked to China’s Communist Party — including a $220 million investment in Berkeley’s joint research project with Tsinghua University — may have elicited a harsh reaction from the Trump administration. But it should not come as a surprise to anyone who has followed the state’s increasingly dependent relationship with China.

For a generation, California’s political and economic elites have been eager to abase themselves for Chinese money. This started under Jerry Brown, who assiduously worked to maintain close ties, but his successor, Gavin Newsom, has gone further, welcoming links with groups controlled by the Communist Party.

Newsom, of course, was the first US Governor to visit China in four years. In 2023, the Governor went to Beijing to kiss the ring and explore “collaboration” with the Communist regime, pleading for statewide carveouts from China’s tariffs. Then a month later, Xi Jinping visited San Francisco, where Newsom and the rest of the state establishment gave him a standing ovation.

This royal treatment might seem odd considering how critical Newsom has been of other “dictators”. Over the last eight years, the California governor has repeatedly attacked Trump over his alleged threat to democracy. But he remains curiously silent on the world’s most powerful — and fascistic — authoritarian regime. To this day, the California Governor has continued to send fraternal missions to China, partnering with organisations controlled, like much of everything, by Communist Party operatives. Clearly, there are some double standards here.

Such subservience makes sense given an economic relationship that already resembles a classic colonial tie. China runs a roughly $107 billion trade surplus with California, and the disparities in such things as electronic machinery are immense. California fares better with services, notably software and other tech licenses as well as universities, but this only amounts to $5 billion.

This dependency may alarm some in Washington, but it conforms to the preferred style of many California progressives. Free trade plays to the state’s deindustrialisation and climate agendas, raising prices inexorably on California companies and households. Even during the Biden years, California greens opposed tariffs on Chinese EVs and some have sought to “take out” Tesla, the only EV-maker producing in the state.

Another concerning element is how Chinese political influence in California resembles patterns seen in places like Australia and Canada. The CCP got very close to the state’s leading politicians, including the late Dianne Feinstein, whose driver was reportedly an agent, and Congressman Eric Swalwell, who had a close connection with an alleged Chinese femme fatale agent. The rot, for all we know, could run much deeper.

California’s entanglement with China reflects a broader pattern of economic dependency and political accommodation that raises serious questions about the state’s values and strategic priorities. While California leaders often champion democratic ideals and environmental progressivism, their willingness to court and appease an authoritarian regime with an abysmal human rights record suggests a troubling double standard. As geopolitical tensions mount, the state may soon have to reckon with the consequences of its deepening ties to a government that views influence abroad as a tool for internal control at home.


Joel Kotkin is a Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University and a Senior Research Fellow at the Civitas Institute, the University of Texas at Austin.

https://unherd.com/newsroom/chinese-influence-is-leaving-california-dangerously-exposed/

ProPublica Awarded Pulitzer After Blaming Georgia Woman’s Abortion Pill Death On Pro-Life Laws

 If Americans needed further proof that the Pulitzer Prize has become nothing more than a glorified gold sticker given to the media’s biggest left-wing propagandists, the award’s 2025 winners are sure to convince them.

Included in the batch of this year’s winners is none other than ProPublica, a left-wing outlet reportedly bankrolled by leftist mega-donors and notorious for running interference for the Democrat Party and its allies. Several of the outlet’s writers won a Pulitzer last year for their dishonest smear campaign against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

The Pulitzer given to ProPublica this year is equally, if not more, reprehensible.

According to the Associated Press, ProPublica’s Kavitha Surana, Lizzie Presser, Cassandra Jaramillo, and Stacy Kranitz were awarded for what the AP characterizes as “reporting on pregnant women who died after doctors delayed urgent care in states with strict abortion laws.” What the Associated Press declines to mention, however, is that ProPublica’s “reporting” was left-wing propaganda designed to vilify life-saving pro-life laws in states across the country.

As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd reported, ProPublica ran a story by Surana less than two months before the 2024 general election of a Georgia woman named Amber Thurman and her unborn twins. While Thurman “died in 2022 after … suffer[ing] untreated complications from the dangerous drug regimen responsible for more than half of the nation’s abortions,” ProPublica “blam[ed] confusion about Georgia’s lifesaving abortion limits for [her] death.”

“A closer look at the circumstances that led to the single mother’s passing, however, indicates that she died on the table during a surgery only needed because she suffered severe complications from ingesting abortion pills associated with sometimes fatal complications,” Boyd wrote. “Thanks to the Biden administration’s radically relaxed abortion pill expansions, Thurman was able to induce abortion hours away at home unsupervised.”

These facts didn’t matter to the rest of the legacy media and Democrats, who gleefully took the propaganda gifted to them by ProPublica and used it to attack Republican-supported pro-life laws. The outlet’s dishonest framing was even parroted by 2024 Democrat presidential nominee Kamala Harris and her running mate Tim Walz, the latter of whom spouted multiple falsehoods about the matter during his debate with now-Vice President J.D. Vance.

Last week, the Ethics and Public Policy Center published the “largest known study of the abortion pill,” in which researchers found a shocking “10.93 percent of women experience sepsis, infection, hemorrhaging, or another serious or life-threatening adverse event within 45 days following a mifepristone abortion, far greater than the summary figure of ‘less than 0.5 percent’ in clinical trials reported on the drug label.”

Unsurprisingly, much of legacy media ignored or the analysis’ troubling findings.

https://thefederalist.com/2025/05/05/propublica-awarded-pulitzer-after-blaming-georgia-womans-abortion-pill-death-on-pro-life-laws/

LifeMD Reports First Quarter 2025 Results and Raises Full-Year 2025 Guidance

 

  • Total revenues increased 49% year-over-year to $65.7 million with telehealth revenue up 70%
  • Adjusted EBITDA increased to $8.7 million from $0.1 million in the year-ago period
  • Telehealth adjusted EBITDA increased to $5.3 million from a loss of $1.3 million in the year-ago period
  • GAAP net income of $0.6 million or $0.01 per diluted share, delivering first-ever quarter of positive GAAP EPS
  • Raising full-year 2025 guidance for both total revenues and adjusted EBITDA, reflecting strong year-to-date performance in telehealth

Conference call begins at 4:30 p.m. Eastern time today

LifeMD’s management will host a conference call today at 4:30 p.m. Eastern time to discuss the Company’s financial results and outlook, and answer questions. Details for the call are as follows:

Toll-free dial-in number:800-225-9448
International dial-in number:203-518-9708
Conference ID:LIFEMD
Live & Archived Webcast:Link


A live and archived webcast will be available in the Investors section of the Company’s website at ir.lifemd.com.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/05/06/3075516/6480/en/LifeMD-Reports-First-Quarter-2025-Results-and-Raises-Full-Year-2025-Guidance.html

HALOZYME RAISES 2025 FINANCIAL GUIDANCE RANGES AND REPORTS STRONG FIRST Q

 Announcing New $250M Share Repurchase 

Total Revenue Increased 35% YOY to $265 million and Royalty Revenue Increased 39% YOY to $168 million

Net Income Increased 54% YOY to $118 million; Adjusted EBITDA Increased 40% YOY to $162 million; GAAP Diluted EPS Increased 55% YOY to $0.93; non-GAAP Diluted EPS Increased 41% YOY to $1.11

Raising 2025 Financial Guidance Ranges for Total Revenue to $1,200 - $1,280 million, Representing YOY Growth of 18% - 26%, Adjusted EBITDA to $790 - $840 million, Representing YOY Growth of 25% - 33% and non-GAAP Diluted EPS to $5.30 - $5.70, Representing YOY Growth of 25% - 35%

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/halozyme-raises-2025-financial-guidance-200100058.html

WW International plunges 43% on Chapter 11 bankruptcy plans

 WW International, Inc. (NASDAQ:WW), formerly known as Weight Watchers, saw its stock plummet 43% after announcing plans to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection alongside its first quarter earnings release.

The weight loss company reported Q1 adjusted earnings per share of -$0.47, missing analyst estimates of -$0.29. Revenue came in at $186.6 million, surpassing expectations of $180.06 million but still declining 9.7% YoY.

WW International said it is engaged in "substantive discussions" with lenders and noteholders on a plan to significantly reduce its debt obligations through a prepackaged Chapter 11 filing, which it expects to occur "imminently."

"We are making progress on our strategic priorities with continued momentum in our Clinical business, while laying the foundation for long-term, sustainable growth," said CEO Tara Comonte.

The company ended the quarter with 3.4 million total subscribers, down 14.2% YoY. However, its Clinical subscriber base grew 55.2% to 135,000.

Clinical subscription revenues jumped 57.1% YoY to $29.5 million, partially offsetting declines in the core behavioral weight loss business.

Despite lower overall revenue, WW International improved its adjusted EBITDAS to $26.9 million from $7.2 million a year ago through cost-cutting measures.

The company is not providing full-year 2025 guidance due to the pending bankruptcy restructuring. WW International had $236.3 million in cash at quarter-end, including $171.3 million drawn from its revolving credit facility.

https://www.investing.com/news/earnings/ww-international-plunges-43-on-chapter-11-bankruptcy-plans-93CH-4026276

Novel Shoe Intervention May Cut Low Back Pain, Delay Knee Arthroplasty in Osteoarthritis

 A shoe-based biomechanical intervention worn for a short time each day may achieve greater improvements in low back pain and greater reductions in the risk for total knee replacement surgery than standard physical therapy, according to two studies presented at the World Congress on Osteoarthritis (OARSI) 2025 Annual Meeting.

“If you’ve ever watched somebody who has pain — whether it’s knee pain, hip pain, back pain — they walk a little strange,” said presenter Matthew Bartels, MD, MPH, director of Rehabilitation Medicine and professor of physical medicine and rehabilitation at Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City. But walking differently to compensate for pain can actually make the problem worse, directing the ground force through the affected area of the body, whether the knee or lower back.

Bartels presented data from two studies of the US Food and Drug Administration–cleared shoe-based intervention, which “alters the foot’s pressure points to reduce loads, minimize symptoms, and promote neuromuscular control training using adjustable, convex pods under the sole,” according to the researchers.

The first was a randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of the intervention and standard physical therapy on pain in 162 patients with low back pain. Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio either to the shoe-based intervention from AposHealth — which was individually tailored and calibrated six times over 1 year — or to standard physical therapy. In addition to being presented at OARSI, the trial was recently published in Global Spine Journal.

At 1 year after randomization, those who used the shoe-based intervention reported a significantly greater mean 3.5-point reduction in their pain scores, as measured on a 10-point numeric rating scale, compared with a mean 1.8-point reduction in those who received physical therapy.

The participants in the intervention also reported better secondary outcomes, including greater improvements in their Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System function scores, gait speed, and overall quality of life.

Bartels told Medscape Medical News that the intervention was likely to have greater compliance than physical therapy because patients could use it at home for as little as 15 minutes at a time and feel the benefits pretty quickly.

“We all know that if you have knee or back pain, physical therapy will make you better, but the problem is, people don’t keep the exercises up,” he said. “This is a treatment that you put the shoes on, and you just wear them doing normal activities for a period, so it doesn’t take time out of your day.”

Bartels’ own experience of his patients using the shoes was that even if patients did stop wearing them once their symptoms improved, they often started using them again if their symptoms returned, “so they kind of self-dose,” he said.

The second study Bartels presented was a poster detailing the results of a retrospective registry review of 95 patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) who had been prescribed the shoe intervention after exhausting other nonsurgical options to see whether it was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of total knee replacement surgery. The study was also published last year in the Journal of Musculoskeletal Research.

After an average follow-up time of 5.6 years, 12.6% of the patients using the shoe had undergone total knee replacement compared with 34.3% of a control group of patients from the same period who received traditional physical therapy.

“Increased use of biomechanical intervention to treat knee OA may help reduce some of the burden on healthcare and society associated with end-stage knee OA by delaying or avoiding surgery,” the researchers wrote.

Commenting on the two studies, physical therapist and epidemiologist Garrett Bullock, PhD, DPT, of Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, said, “For a specific type of patient that has tried exercise interventions, has tried medication interventions, and a combination of both, that has a decent amount of physical activity, it may be something to explore, particularly to maintain neutral balance or create a better line through the foot.”

Bullock told Medscape Medical News that there was always a risk that patients wouldn’t adhere to physical therapy, so an intervention that provided education and the tools for self-efficacy could help them to manage their own symptoms.

The clinical study was supported by AposHealth, which provided devices for the conduct of the trial. No conflicts of interest were declared by Bartels or Bullock.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/novel-shoe-intervention-may-cut-low-back-pain-delay-knee-2025a1000awu

'Most Babies Protected Against RSV During First Season Immunization Was Available'

 

  • During the first RSV season in which a maternal vaccine and a monoclonal antibody for infants were available, 72% of infants were immunized, this study found.
  • Disparities in access to immunization existed by race and ethnicity, with the lowest uptake among Black and Middle Eastern/North African mothers.
  • The findings strongly suggested that clinicians and parents are following ACIP guidance.

During the first respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season in which a maternal vaccine and a monoclonal antibody for infants were available, most infants were immunized via either intervention, according to an analysis of Vaccine Safety Datalink data.

Overall, 72% of 36,949 infants were immunized in the 2023-2024 RSV season with either the bivalent RSV prefusion F protein vaccine (Abrysvo) or nirsevimab (Beyfortus), Stephanie Irving, MHS, of the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research in Portland, Oregon, and colleagues reported in Pediatricsopens in a new tab or window.

"This really is a success story," Irving told MedPage Today, "but it is important to also point out that more than a quarter of infants were not immunized against RSV."

The researchers also noted that there were disparities in access by race and ethnicity, with lowest uptake among Black (60.5%) and Middle Eastern/North African (60.2%) mothers. Rates were highest among Asian mothers (83.7%).

In an accompanying editorialopens in a new tab or window, Natasha Halasa, MD, MPH, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, and colleagues said the findings "provide a crucial early assessment" of RSV immunization in the U.S. and represent "an encouraging level of early adoption" of these new tools.

However, they wrote, more research is needed to "identify barriers to equitable uptake."

In the summer of 2023, the FDA approved nirsevimabopens in a new tab or window and the maternal RSV vaccineopens in a new tab or window, both of which involve a single dose and offer seasonal RSV protection. CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendedopens in a new tab or window both strategiesopens in a new tab or window independently -- but noted that nirsevimab isn't needed on top of maternal vaccination, unless a baby is born within 2 weeks of antenatal vaccination or is at high risk for severe RSV and would benefit from extra protection.

To assess uptake of interventions available during that first RSV season, Irving and colleagues assessed data from 10 of 11 Vaccine Safety Datalink sites, focusing on pregnancies that reached at least 32 weeks' gestation between Sept. 22, 2003 and Jan. 31, 2024, and ended in a live birth before April 1, 2024. Most pregnant women were between 25 and 34 years old, and were Hispanic or Latino (34.5%), white (29.9%), or Asian (17.8%).

Overall, more infants were protected via the monoclonal antibody (42.5%) than by maternal vaccination (32%). However, the distribution of RSV product shifted over the study period. Infants born September to December 2023 more often received nirsevimab, while those born January through March 2024 more often received antenatal vaccination, likely reflecting the timing of nirsevimab shortages and the rollout of the maternal vaccine, according to the researchers.

"Mothers who were vaccinated in the 32-to-36-week window in October went on to have babies in December, which is when we saw an increase in the number of infants immunized via antenatal vaccination," Irving said. "Babies born in the fall were born to mothers who didn't have an opportunity to receive the vaccine during pregnancy, and they chose to immunize via nirsevimab."

The study also strongly suggested that clinicians and parents are following ACIP guidance, with 95% of mothers receiving the vaccine within the recommended 32 to 36 weeks' gestation period. Also, of the 810 infants exposed to the maternal vaccine fewer than 14 days before birth, 72% subsequently received nirsevimab, as recommended by ACIP.

Despite the early good results, the editorialists noted that the COVID pandemic "has reshaped the landscape of vaccine acceptance, with patients expressing hesitancy toward newly introduced vaccines."

"The growing influence of social media misinformation, declining trust in public health institutions, and healthcare provider burnout further contribute to challenges in uptake," Halasa and colleagues warned.

Indeed, Cindy Prins, PhD, MPH, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine, who was not involved in the study, agreed that the pandemic triggered an avalanche of misinformation and distrust in clinical research, and that vaccine hesitancy in pregnancyopens in a new tab or window remains common.

Study limitations included that while the Vaccine Safety Datalink is "demographically representative," it may not reflect the broader pregnant population by race and ethnicity. In addition, sites mostly include patients who are privately insured, which could have limited the generalizability of the findings.

In addition, Prins noted that the 10 Vaccine Safety Datalink sites spanned most geographic regions except the South, which may have differing attitudes on vaccination.

Disclosures

The study was supported by the CDC.

Irving had no disclosures. Co-authors reported relationships with Pfizer, the NIH, the Garfield Memorial Fund, Hologic, and Johnson & Johnson.

The editorialists reported relationships with Sanofi, Quidel, Merck, and CSL Seqirus.

Primary Source

Pediatrics

Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowIrving SA, et al "Infant respiratory syncytial virus immunization coverage in the Vaccine Safety Datalink: 2023-2024" Pediatrics 2025; DOI: 10.1542/peds.2024-070240.

Secondary Source

Pediatrics

Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowHalasa NB, et al "Barriers to administering maternal RSV vaccination and monoclonal antibodies" Pediatrics 2025; DOI: 0.1542/peds.2025-070649.


https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/rsv/115444