The founder of 23andMe, Anne Wojcicki, has asked a U.S. judge to reopen an auction for the genetic testing company, saying she has the support of a Fortune 500 company with a current market capitalization of more than $400 billion.
Wojcicki did not name the Fortune 500 company in court filings.
South San Francisco, California-based 23andMe filed for bankruptcy in April, seeking to sell its business at auction after a decline in consumer demand and a 2023 data breach that exposed sensitive genetic and personal information of millions of customers.
Last month, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals agreed to buy the firm for $256 million, topping a $146 million bid from Wojcicki and TTAM Research Institute, which was founded by Wojcicki and describes itself as a California non-profit public benefit corporation.
In a filing dated May 31, Wojcicki claimed that 23andMe's debtors had attempted to tilt the sales process away from TTAM and in favor of Regeneron.
TTAM and Wojcicki said in the filing that 23andMe’s financial and legal advisers unfairly capped their maximum bid at $250 million due to misplaced concerns about TTAM's "financial wherewithal". The plaintiffs said the auction was prematurely concluded before they had the opportunity to submit a bid that would have exceeded $280 million.
The company's debtors said the auction results came after an extensive and careful consideration by a four-member special committee of independent directors, according to the filing.
According to another filing, 23andMe is seeking court approval to let Wojcicki and Regeneron submit final proposals by June 12. 23andMe is also seeking a $10 million breakup fee for Regeneron if Wojcicki’s bid is ultimately accepted.
Lawyers for 23andMe's debtors, TTAM parties and Regeneron did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.
https://www.aol.com/23andme-founder-aims-restart-auction-215154018.html
Police said a male suspect was taken into custody on Sunday after an attack that injured multiple people in Boulder, Colorado, in what the FBI director described as a "targeted" act of terror.
While stressing that the information was “very preliminary,” Boulder Police Chief Stephen Redfearn said that the man was apprehended following calls to the police dispatch of someone with a weapon who was “setting people on fire.”
Redfearn said he wasn’t in a position to identify the suspect yet, noting that he’d been taken to the hospital. He said there were multiple injuries among the victims, ranging “from very serious to more minor."
The Boulder attack occurred in the vicinity of a walk to remember the Israeli hostages who remain in Gaza.
FBI Director Kash Patel, in a statement, described the incident as a targeted terror attack and said agents were on the scene.
Redfearn, however, said it was too early to speculate about a motive.
“We are not calling it a terror attack at this moment,” he said. “This was a beautiful Sunday afternoon in downtown Boulder on Pearl Street and this act was unacceptable,” he said. “I ask that you join me in thinking about the victims, the families of those victims, and everyone involved in this tragedy.”
The incident comes amid heightened tensions in the United States over Israel's war in Gaza, which has spurred both a an increase in antisemitic hate crime as well as moves by conservative supporters of Israel led by President Donald Trump to branded pro-Palestinian protests as antisemitic. His administration has detained protesters without charge and cut off funding to elite U.S. universities that have permitted the demonstrations.
It also follows the arrest of a Chicago-born man in the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy employees in Washington, D.C. Someone opened fire on a group of people leaving an event hosted by the American Jewish Committee, an advocacy group that fights antisemitism and supports Israel.
The shooting fueled polarization in the United States over the war in Gaza between supporters of Israel and pro-Palestinian demonstrators.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-investigating-targeted-terror-attack-213252721.html
A lot happened in the Russia-Ukraine war on Sunday, and as the dust settles from Ukraine's major drone attacks which struck airbases and destroyed strategic bombers deep inside Russian territory, details of other parallel, devastating alleged 'sabotage attacks' are emerging.
Two bridges have collapsed in Russia’s western regions bordering Ukraine on Sunday morning, which derailed trains and left at least seven people dead, and dozens more injured.
"It was not clear on Sunday morning whether the two incidents — which both involved trains — in neighboring Bryansk and Kursk were related, or what exactly caused the separate collapses," CNN reports.
Railway authorities said of the Bryansk incident that "illegal interference" was the cause, with regional governor Alexander Bogomaz saying a bridge had been "blown up".
CNN details that "The bridge came down in the region’s Vygonichi district, about 100 kilometers (62 miles) from the Ukrainian border, crushing the moving train and injuring at least 66 people, including three children, Russian authorities reported."
Russian state media is giving 'sabotage' as the reason for the train derailments:
Videos circulating in Telegram show a crushed train carriage with passengers being evacuated through shattered windows, and emergency services responding at the scene. The collapse also reportedly affected vehicles on the bridge, which fell onto the railway below.
Russia’s Ministry of Emergency Situations (MChS) reported that fire and rescue units are actively working at the site of the bridge collapse. “All necessary assistance is being provided to the victims. Additional MChS forces, emergency rescue equipment, and lighting towers for nighttime operations have been deployed to the area,” the ministry noted in an official statement.
Russian media sources published videos of bystanders of the scene of a major train derailment:
New vid of CHAOTIC moments after Bryansk region bridge collapse
— RT (@RT_com) June 1, 2025
People rush to help man trapped in railroad car
Train left sprawled SIDEWAYS https://t.co/BdfL9IHfBq pic.twitter.com/x0WYsLlkFD
Apparently this wasn't the first effort to blow up train tracks, in a brazen act of targeting civilian transport infrastructure. RT writes that--
"Just days earlier, a freight train in Russia’s Belgorod Region ran over an explosive device planted under the tracks, causing a powerful blast. According to the governor Vyacheslav Gladkov, the explosion damaged the railway’s contact network but caused no casualties."
Several different scenes of twisted metal and train 'accidents' emerged Sunday.
CNN says there was even a third train incident, which occurred Saturday night:
In a third incident on Saturday night, a Russian military freight train was blown up near the occupied city of Melitopol in Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region, according to the Defense Intelligence of Ukraine.
“As a result of the explosion, the train with fuel tanks and freight cars derailed on the railway track,” the intelligence service said.
The freight train was moving towards Russian-occupied Crimea via a “key logistical artery” often used by Russian forces, the authority added.
Mystery as Russia is rocked by 3 train crashes in one night after bridges collapse & tracks ‘blown up’ leaving 7 dead https://t.co/7Ud9UqusR4
— Corby Zone (@MissionArtist) June 1, 2025
The timing of these attacks suggests likely coordination with the huge drone swarm attacks on Sunday out of Ukraine.
Kiev officials have already long described that they want to make life chaotic and dangerous inside Russia, in hopes that society could be destabilized which could in turn destabilize the government and Putin's rule.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has drawn intense criticism—much of it deserved—for his stance on vaccines. But lost in the uproar is a surprising fact: many of his ideas for improving American health align with mainstream medical thinking.
As a medical school professor and former senior official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, I understand the dangers of vaccine misinformation. Yet I’ve also watched Kennedy be vilified for promoting views long embraced by public health professionals. This raises a legitimate question: are his ideas the real problem—or is it the messenger?
Last week, officials appointed by Kennedy to lead the FDA called for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of new vaccines. Critics were quick to label the proposal unethical, dangerous, or anti-science. But demanding rigorous evidence is the foundation of science, not a betrayal of it.
Take COVID-19 vaccines. Five years into the pandemic, only 23% of U.S. adults have received the latest booster, despite strong government recommendations. One reason may be growing public skepticism about the strength of the supporting evidence. Pew surveys show that 60% of Americans plan to skip the 2024–2025 shot. That skepticism isn’t entirely baseless. Over 83% of healthcare workers declined the 2023-2024 COVID booster.
Many of the updated COVID boosters were authorized based on limited preclinical data, sometimes just small animal studies. When human trials were conducted, they often included fewer than 50 participants. At the same time, boosters have been recommended across all age groups, despite the fact that serious COVID complications are overwhelmingly concentrated among older adults. CDC data show that 95% of Americans over age 50 have already received at least one dose, while children and young adults, who face much lower risk, are still encouraged to receive additional shots. Broad recommendations invite reasonable scrutiny.
Some argue that the science was “settled” by the original Pfizer and Moderna trials in 2021, which reported 95% efficacy. But those results referred only to mild, symptomatic infections. COVID occurred in less than 1% of participants in either group—0.05% in the vaccine group and 0.87% in the placebo group. The claim that the trials demonstrated a mortality benefit is incorrect. Among over 73,000 participants, there was just one COVID-related death, in the placebo group—not enough for meaningful statistical inference. Worse, two months after the data were reported, both trials unblinded participants and offered the vaccine to those in the placebo group, ending any chance to assess long-term outcomes.
Side effects were common. Compared to those receiving a placebo, vaccine recipients were 35 times more likely to experience a fever over 100.4°F, 5.6 times more likely to report injection site pain, and 5.6 times more likely to experience severe fatigue. A controversial reanalysis published in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccine found approximately one serious adverse event for every 800 vaccinated individuals. For context, the 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled from the market after it was linked to Guillain-Barré syndrome at a rate of about 1 in 100,000.
Yes, observational studies suggest that vaccines reduce hospitalizations and deaths. But these studies are vulnerable to selection bias. People who choose vaccination often differ from those who decline it in many ways—age, education, income, health status, and political beliefs. Only randomized trials can adequately isolate the true effect of a vaccine, free from such confounding factors.
RCTs are the gold standard in medicine. We require them to test treatments for cancer, hypertension, and heart disease. Why should vaccines—especially those developed and authorized in record time—be exempt?
The FDA’s updated policy reflects the current understanding of COVID-19 risk, which is highest among adults over age 65. In response, the agency now recommends annual COVID-19 boosters for older adults, aligning U.S. guidelines with those of other high-income countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Vaccines will remain available for both older adults and individuals with underlying health conditions that increase the risk of severe illness. For healthy individuals between 6 months and 64 years of age, the potential risks of vaccination may outweigh the benefits; therefore, further clinical trials will be encouraged to better assess vaccine safety and effectiveness in these groups.
Let me be clear: I’m not opposed to COVID boosters. I’ve taken them all, on schedule. People should have access to vaccines and make decisions in consultation with their physicians. But we also owe the public clear, current, and rigorous evidence. Conducting well-designed randomized trials isn’t fringe—it’s standard scientific practice.
Kennedy’s call for more rigorous science shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand simply because of who he is. Martin Makary and Vinay Prasad, the FDA’s newly appointed leaders, are both academic physicians with unusually distinguished research records. While not without controversy, they bring serious scientific credentials to the discussion.
If the latest vaccines and boosters are as effective and safe as claimed, high-quality trials will confirm it. If not, we deserve to know. Either way, public trust depends not on ideology, but on transparent, credible evidence.
Treatment with casdatifan, a HIF-2a inhibitor, plus cabozantinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, showed a confirmed overall response rate (ORR) of 46% in patients who reached a minimum of 12 weeks (two scans) of follow-up
