FLU OUTBREAK: Now Impacting 46 States, Epidemic is ‘Widespread’

This year’s strain of the flu is now widespread, spanning 46 states, and can make you fatally sick.  Coupled with how fast the flu has struck, an ineffective vaccine, and how early it hit, this year is shaping up to be one of the worst ones yet for the flu virus.

The strain responsible for the outbreak is H3N2, a particularly deadly variety of influenza and the number of cases have spiked, with 46 states now reporting widespread activity, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. The CDC also claims that at least 13 children have died from the flu since October when the season began to really get into full swing.

California has been particularly hard hit, with at least 27 deaths of people under 65 attributed to the flu, according to reports. As the number of cases continues to climb there, hospitals are beginning to run out of Tamiflu, the anti-viral medication used to treat the illness.

The most identified strain of the virus is influenza A (H3N2). According to a CDC emergency health advisory released December 27, 83 percent of reported cases were N3N2, a strain associated with more hospitalizations and deaths in those over 65 years of age and in young children compared to other age groups.

During this year’s flu season in Australia, the vaccine was only 10 percent effective. The CDC still says you should get the flu shot because it will lessen the suffering from symptoms should you contract the flu, even though it will make you sicker in later years. 

“How well the vaccine works can depend in part on the match between the vaccine virus used to produce the vaccine and the circulating viruses that season,” the CDC notes. “It’s not possible to predict what viruses will be most predominant during the upcoming season.” The agency also noted that the vaccine is ineffective due to the mutative nature of this year’s flu strain.

The CDC recommends that all people over the age of five get the shot to reduce the symptoms of the virus.  “It’s not too late to get a flu vaccine — as long as flu is spreading vaccination should continue,” the CDC’s Kristen Nordlund told weather.com. “It’s important to know that it takes about two weeks for protection to set in.”

*This is not to say you should or should not get the flu shot.  You should, however, do some research, and know the risks, side effects, and possible complications down the line should you chose to get or not get this year’s flu shot. This should help you come to the right conclusion for yourself.

Flu Outbreak: Medicine Shortages And A Rising Death Toll In California

A severe flu outbreak has struck California making the medicine used to treat the illness sparse, and filling emergency rooms with those suffering from the symptoms. The death toll is also rising rapidly as more and more people are succumbing to the virus.

According to the LA Times, health officials said Friday that 27 people younger than 65 have died of the flu in California since October, compared with three at the same time last year. Nationwide and in California, flu activity spiked sharply in late December and continues to grow. For example, the emergency room at UCLA Medical Center in Santa Monica typically treats about 140 patients a day, but at least one day this week had more than 200 patients mostly because of the flu, said the ER’s medical director, Dr. Wally Ghurabi. “The Northridge earthquake was the last time we saw over 200 patients,” Ghurabi said.

The flu season normally peaks in February, but experts claim that this year, it’s peaking early, and that’s why there have been so many flu victims.  The flu season is typically worst around February but can reach its height anytime from October to April. Though influenza had only killed three Californians at this time last year, it had taken 68 lives by the end of February, according to state data.

Many California doctors, however, maintain that the recent surge has been unusually severe. “Rates of influenza are even exceeding last year, and last year was one of the worst flu seasons in the last decade,” said Dr. Randy Bergen, clinical lead of the flu vaccine program for Kaiser Permanente in Northern California.

State health officials also said Friday that there was no region of the state where people were being spared from the flu. In Riverside and San Bernardino counties, ambulance services have been severely strained because of the number of flu calls coming in, local health officials said. “The ambulances have to wait … and if they’re waiting there, they can’t be out on calls,” said Jose Arballo Jr., spokesman for the Riverside County Department of Public Health.

Plus, emergency rooms are so crowded that ambulances arriving at hospitals can’t immediately unload their patients, so they’re unable to leave for incoming 911 calls.

Outbreak Alert: Hepatitis A Continues To Worsen In Michigan

More than 600 Hepatitis A cases have been reported in Southeast Michigan as the outbreak continues to ravage the communities. Public health officials are continuing to see these numbers elevate, and warn that it will continue to worsen as we approach the holidays.

According to Voice News, more than 80 percent of those who have contracted the highly contagious liver disease have required hospitalization. Another 20 people have died after becoming infected with the virus. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that symptoms can be mild or severe depending on the health of the person who contracts the virus. The elderly and those with existing liver conditions are the most at risk. Those infected can be contagious for up to two weeks before showing any symptoms, which include fever, fatigue, loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, abdominal and joint pain, yellowing of the skin, dark urine and light-colored stools.

The virus is spread through direct person-to-person contact, contaminated food and beverages, and illicit drug use. But this outbreak is difficult for health officials to contain since no common source of the outbreak has been identified, health officials said.  Washing your hands after going to the bathroom and before preparing meals for yourself and others, using your own towels, toothbrushes and eating utensils, and not sharing food and drinks with other people are all good ways to prevent the spread of the disease.

An increased number of hepatitis A cases has been seen in recent months. In the fall of 2016, possible hepatitis A exposure related to frozen strawberries that were recalled nationwide was identified at four locations in St. Clair County and one location in Macomb County. In May, a confirmed case was discovered at the St. Clair County Detention and Intervention Center in Port Huron.

In October, an employee at the Algonac Flaming Grill was found to have hepatitis A, leading local health officials to recommend vaccinations to those who ate at the restaurant between Oct. 6 and 20. The St. Clair County Health Department offered the vaccine at several recent walk-in clinics.

Food workers with the disease have the ability to infect a large number of people rapidly and are encouraged to get vaccinated.

The holidays also pose an increased risk of exposure to hepatitis A as families and friends come together to celebrate. –  Voice News

A national shortage of the vaccine has complicated efforts to contain outbreaks, but the St. Clair County Health Department reports an adequate local supply of the adult vaccine. Health officials state that the best way to prevent contraction of the hepatitis A virus is by getting two doses of the vaccine. Protection will begin two to four weeks after the first injection.  The second injection will offer protection for a longer period of time.

Philly Admits Soda Tax Is Crushing Local Small Businesses, Expanding "Food Deserts"

 Just one week after Chicago shockingly repealed their soda ban following a revolt from local business owners (see: Soda Tax Fizzles In Chicago As Cook County Officials Cast Decisive 15-1 Repeal Vote), it seems that Philadelphia"s flirtations with forming a more perfect "nanny state" via the elimination of sugary drinks could be on a collision course with a similar fate.

As WHYY points out today, a survey conducted by Philadelphia"s Controller Alan Butkovitz — a longtime opponent of the soda tax — found that nine out of 10 businesses reported revenue loss since the city’s sweetened beverage tax took effect earlier this year. Of those reporting revenue loss, 60% of them blamed the soda tax for their woes.

City Controller Alan Butkovitz today released the results of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax survey that found more than 60 percent of businesses indicated a revenue loss as a direct result of the new tax.

 

Of the 650 businesses that reported a decline in year-to-year revenue, more than 400 attributed “most” or “all” of the decline to the implementation of the Beverage Tax.  The majority of these businesses reported revenue losses of more than 10 percent.

 

“The overwhelming majority of businesses that carry products subject to the Philadelphia Beverage Tax feel a significant impact as a result of the tax,” said Controller Butkovitz.  “The tax has had detrimental effects.”

 

Butkovitz’s team, with help from various business groups, reached out to “more than 1,600” businesses that sell or sold taxed beverages. Response was purely voluntary, and 741 businesses filled out questionnaires.

 

“This is not going to be the comprehensive answer to everything, but I think it does create a serious warning and an attestation of what has been stated by a number of the businesses,” he said during a Monday news conference. “Because I think the administration has minimized and ridiculed the idea that businesses are fighting for survival.”

To our great "shock", many Philadelphia grocers reported that customers were simply driving to the suburbs to do their weekly shopping which means that local retailers lost not only their soda sales but everything else as well.

And, as usual, the Office of the Controller noted that this latest misinformed regulatory overstep by Philly"s liberal elites is most detrimental to the very same people it was intended to help, namely low-income, inner-city families who can"t afford to travel to the suburbs for groceries and who are about to get crushed with higher prices following a wave of business failures.

According to Controller Butkovitz, the areas with the most businesses reporting revenue losses included West Philadelphia along the Market Street and 52nd Street corridors (19139), Hunting Park in North Philadelphia (19140), and areas around Juniata and Frankford (19124).  Many businesses in these neighborhoods reported losses of more than 10 percent.

 

“Consequently, these zipcodes have neighborhoods with some of the highest poverty rates in the city,” said Controller Butkovitz.  “These businesses cannot afford a one percent loss in business – let alone more than 10 percent.

 

“These are also neighborhoods subject to food deserts in Philadelphia. If these stores cannot continue to operate, it will be even more difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food.”

 

Grocery stores reported the most revenue losses followed by convenience stores and restaurants.  Forty percent of businesses indicated they would have to make significant changes to keep their doors open.

 

"The tax seems to be impacting behavior and orientation toward the future,” said Controller Butkovitz.  “Many business owners seem apprehensive about the viability of their enterprises in the near and medium term."

Of course, facts have never really had much impact on political discourse in the past so absent an uprising from local business owners, similar to what we saw recently in Chicago, we wouldn"t suggest holding your breadth while waiting for a repeal.

 

Grab A Beer Philadelphia, The Soda Is Too Damn Expensive

Via SovereignMan.com,

What happened:

Turns out when soda cost the same as beer, people choose to drink beer. That is what is happening in Philadelphia.

The city’s 1.5 cent per ounce tax on soda has made beer a cheaper option. But that isn’t the only effect of the ill conceived plan to raise revenue.

The tax didn’t raise the money expected, according t o a study by the Tax Foundation.

Stores have already seen huge declines in soda sales, meaning people are either going outside the city to buy, buying beer instead, or not drinking soda.

Now if the residents did cut down on soda, some might see this as a win, despite the low tax revenue. But from the outset, the Mayor was quite clear that the aim of the tax was to raise money, not to influence health.

The city claimed the tax revenue would fund pre-kindergarten programs. But less than half of the meager revenue is actually being put into the school system.

What this means:

Looks like “for the children” was just another excuse for government greed.

Governments refuse to believe in economics. They think they can just continue to pile the taxes on. But once the costs get too high, people change their behavior.

Sometimes that means going somewhere else to buy your soda. Sometimes that means making different choices, like beer instead of soda.

But hardly ever do governments get what they predict. The mayor even originally wanted the tax to be 3 cents per ounce. Some stores are reporting a 50% drop in soda sales, so you can imagine what would have happened at double the tax rate. Yet all the greedy politicians imagine is dollar signs.

The beer companies are really the only ones who made out on the deal.

Might make a conspiracy theorist wonder...

From Coke To Coors: Philly Soda Tax Leading To Alcoholism As Beer Now Cheaper Than Soda

Perhaps The Burning Platform summarized the idiocy of Philadelphia"s soda tax better than anyone to date:

In a shocking development, the Philadelphia soda tax is a big fucking fail. Who could have predicted that. Democrat government drones and their brain dead minions are so desperate for money to fund their gold plated union pensions and bloated salaries, they lie, cheat and tax the poor into oblivion. Result: lost jobs, further impoverished poor people, no help for children, more closed businesses, and a further hole in the city budget. But at least the city union workers can keep their gold plated pensions – for now. Maff is hard for liberals, but it always wins in the end.

But, as The Washington Free Beacon points out, the unfortunate side effects of Philly"s disastrous soda tax may not be limited just to the economic consequences enumerated above.  As a study by the Tax Foundation recently found, there are social consequences as well with people now choosing to substitute beer for soda in light of the fact that, well, beer is just cheaper.

Philadelphia"s tax on sugary drinks has made soda more expensive than beer in the city.

The Tax Foundation released a new study on the excise tax last week, finding that the 1.5-cent per ounce tax has fallen short of revenue projections, cost jobs, and has forced some Philadelphians to drive outside the city to buy groceries.

The study finds that the tax is 24 times higher than the Pennsylvania tax rate on beer.

"Purchases of beer are also now less expensive than nonalcoholic beverages subject to the tax in the city," according to the study, written by Courtney Shupert and Scott Drenkard. "Empirical evidence from a 2012 journal article suggests that soda taxes can push consumers to alcohol, meaning it is likely the case that consumers are switching to alcoholic beverages as a result of the tax. The paper, aptly titled From Coke to Coors, further shows that switching from soda to beer increases total caloric intake, even as soda taxes are generally aimed at caloric reduction."

While not terribly surprising, the study found that while Philly"s soda tax was sold to taxpayers as a way to raise money for local schools, less than half of the proceeds are actually being used for that purpose. 

The Tax Foundation points out that unlike most cities, Philadelphia passed the tax specifically to raise revenue, not to fight obesity. The city even includes diet sodas in its tax, as a way to raise money for pre-kindergarten programs.

However, less than half of the $39.4 million collected since the tax went into effect on Jan. 1 has gone to education funding.

"[T]he tax was originally promoted as a vehicle to raise funds for prekindergarten education, but in practice it awards just 49 percent of the soda tax revenues to local pre-K programs," Shupert and Drenkard write. "Another 20 percent of the soda tax revenues fund government employee benefits or city programs, while the rest of the money will go towards parks, libraries, and community schools."

Meanwhile, lower soda sales have already started to claim the jobs of grocery and soda distribution workers.

Collections from the soda tax are also well below original projections of $92 million per year, due to tax avoidance.

"Soda sales in Philadelphia have also declined since the tax went into effect at the beginning of 2017, threatening the long-run sustainability of the tax," Shupert and Drenkard write. "According to some local distributors and retailers, sales have declined by nearly 50 percent. This is likely primarily due to higher prices, which discourage purchasing beverages in the city."

Earlier this year PepsiCo announced it was laying off up to 100 workers because of the tax, which the company blames for costing a 43 percent drop in business.

Philadelphians are also no longer able to buy 12-packs or 2-liters of Pepsi products in grocery stores due to the tax, the Tax Foundation said.

Way to think it through...

"Loyal" Venezuelan Soldiers Get Their Government-Sponsored 'Rewards'...

I live in South America.  South Americans, in general and including Venezuelans, are not "socialists" any more than Europeans are.  The problem here is that so many politicians on the national level are in the pockets of U.S., European, and now Chinese and Saudi financiers.  The people here have been burned by treasonous politicians so often, and the average voter distrust anyone who appears even moderately pro-U.S., or even pro-European or (recently) pro-Chinese.    Unfortunately, in most South American countries, the socialist parties are the only alternatives.

In Venezuela, you have a situation in which U.S. meddling in that nation"s politics resulted in a socialist counter coup, which has entrenched itself in power.  It was constant U.S. meddling that created this situation, and I assure you that outside of the ruling circle, no one in Venezuela is happy about it.  The U.S. media seems very indignant about supposed "Russian" meddling in the U.S. election in 2016.  Well.. I have news for everyone in the U.S., the U.S. meddles in every election, every year, all the time in South America, and the people here are pissed off about it.

Another Reason For Brexodus? English Syphilis Cases Soar To Highest In 80 Years

It"s not just bankers that are leaving the UK, broad-based Brexodus continues as EU citizens flee the apparently sinking-ship and now, courtesy of the latest report from Public Health England, they have another good reason to leave "Ol Blighty - cases of syphilis have reached their highest level since 1949, new figures have shown.

After the Brexit referendum, more EU citizens are leaving Britain, while less Europeans are coming in. As the latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show, 2016 brought 84,000 less migrants, compared to the previous year. Statista"s Fabian Moebus points out that the net migration of 248,000 people is the lowest number of yearly newcomers in over three years. Immigration from EU countries decreased by 43,000 people while emigration increased by 31,000, which makes Europeans the main factor behind the trend with a net change of minus 74,000.

You will find more statistics at Statista

And now might be an opportune time for "young" Europeans to "Brexodus" some more, as Sky News reports, in 2016, there were 5,920 diagnoses of syphilis - an increase of 12% from the previous year and almost double the 3,001 recorded in 2012.

Dr Michael Brady, medical director at sexual health charity the Terrence Higgins Trust, said:

"Today"s figures show unacceptably high rates of STIs.

"We"re facing huge challenges, such as the continued rise of syphilis and ongoing concerns around drug-resistant gonorrhoea, and we urgently need to address the nation"s poor sexual health and rates of STIs in those most at risk."

He said that cuts in local authority public health budgets were having a "visible impact", including a 9% decrease in the number of chlamydia tests taken.

"It is also now essential that Public Health England, the Department of Health and local authorities ensure improved access to effective STI and HIV testing, treatment and prevention services.

"Otherwise, we cannot expect to address the ongoing sexual health crisis."

The impact of STIs remains greatest in heterosexuals aged 15 to 24, black ethnic minorities and gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.

Seattle Mayor Wants To Tax Diet Soda To Fight "White Privileged Institutionalized Racism"

Back in February, Seattle"s Mayor Ed Murray called for a 2 cent per ounce tax on sugary soft drinks in order to "improve Seattle"s educational opportunities for students of color."  Per Lynx Media, the tax was expected to raise some $16 million per year.

Of course, when someone on his staff pointed out that a tax on sugary drinks would disproportionately impact the minorities that he was apparently trying to help, Murray knew that something drastic had to happen.  So that"s when he decided to launch a new attack against the most recognizable symbol of "white privileged institutionalized racism" on the planet:  DIET SODA!

Per the Seattle Times:

The changes were recommendations that emerged when staff from the mayor’s office and the office of Councilmember Tim Burgess studied disparate impacts the tax could have on people with low incomes and on people of color, according to Murray.

That work involved conversations with community advocates, public-health professionals and business owners, according to the mayor. After Murray’s initial announcement, some suggested the exclusion of beverages with artificial sweeteners would be unfair because affluent white people tend to consume more diet drinks.

And while we suspect that many of our readers who frequently enjoy diet sodas didn"t realize they were racist, trust Ed Murray when he says that you most certainly are...and he"s going to tax you for it.

And now that Democrats have found a way to directly tax "white privilege," we suspect we"re going to see a whole lot more diet soda taxes. 

Of course, Murray"s staffers may also want to remind him of how well Philadelphia"s soda tax has worked out for their mayor.  When Philadelphia became the first US city to pass a soda tax last summer, city officials were eagerly looking forward to the surplus-tax funded windfall to plug gaping budget deficits (and, since this is Philadelphia, the occasional embezzlement scheme). Then, shortly after the tax went into effect on January 1st we showed the tax applied in practice: a receipt for a 10 pack of flavored water carried a 51% beverage tax. And since  PA has a sales tax of 6% and Philly already charges another 2%, the total sales tax was 8%. In other words, a purchase which until last year came to $6.47 had overnight become $9.75.

What happened next? Precisely what most expected would happen: full blown sticker shock, and a collapse in purchases. According to Philly.com reports, just a couple of months into the city’s sweetened-beverage tax, supermarkets and distributors were reporting a 30% to 50% drop in beverage sales and - adding insult to injury - are now planning for layoffs.

Then, a month ago, PepsiCo slashed jobs, blaming the soda tax...

With sales slumping because of the new Philadelphia sweetened beverage tax, Pepsi said that it will lay off 80 to 100 workers at three distribution plants that serve the city.

The company, which employs 423 people in the city, sent out notices and said the layoffs would be spread over the next few months. The layoffs come in response to the  beverage tax, which has cut sales by 40 percent in the city, PepsiCo Inc. spokesman Dave DeCecco said.

“Unfortunately, after careful consideration of the economic realities created by the recently enacted beverage tax, we have been forced to give notice that we intend to eliminate 80 to 100 positions, including frontline and supervisory roles,” DeCecco said.

Outside of the North Philadelphia plant Wednesday, Ed Langdon, a 40-year employee  who shuttles products between warehouses, said the cuts are the most drastic he"s seen in his time at Pepsi. Langdon said the writing was on the wall: Some colleagues who are paid on commission were seeing drastic cuts in weekly pay. "The trucks are going out and they"re coming back with the soda on it," he said. "No one"s buying it. It"s just not happening."

And just a week ago, as Phily.com reported, Coke did the same...

Philadelphia’s new sweetened-beverage tax has led to the loss of 40 Coca-Cola jobs and a 32 percent drop in sales, the company said Friday.

Fran McGorry, president and general manager of Philly Coke, the local Coca-Cola bottler, said in a news release that the job losses are due to commission-based employees leaving the company, not layoffs.

“We are not able to replace those positions right now,” he said. “In total, we have fewer people working in the city while more people are now working outside Philadelphia due to increased demand there. We have also made the decision not to hire seasonal employees for the summer months due to the negative impact the tax is having on our business.”

Of course, if nothing else, Murray"s stupidity at least serves to debunk the notion that "soda taxes" arise from some compassionate attempt on the part of Democrats to eradicate obesity.  And, at a minimum, we can only hope that this embarrassing mishap just might prove to at least a few liberals that these taxes, like Obamacare, are nothing more than just a another money grab from an oppressive government, wrapped in clever packaging to dupe the American public. 

Philadelphia Soda Tax Forces Local University To Hike Student Costs By $400,000

Students at Temple University in Philadelphia, or perhaps their parents, are getting a great lesson today on the real life economic consequences of liberal political policies run amok.  Courtesy of Philly"s new 1.5 cent per ounce "soda tax", Temple has been forced to hike it"s 2017-2018 boarding costs by $400,000, or roughly 4.8%.  Per Philly.com, Temple"s CFO said they will roll back the planned $400,000 meal plan hike if the soda tax is repealed.

Board rates will rise an additional 4.8 percent for 2017-18 solely because of the 1.5-cent-per-ounce sweetened-beverage tax, which went into effect this year, the university said. The tax was enacted to help fund parks, recreation centers, and early childhood education. Heated debate over it continues, with PepsiCo having announced planned layoffs and retailers reporting steep losses.

The total impact of the new tax is estimated to be $400,000 per semester, said Ken Kaiser, Temple"s chief financial officer. The university will roll back the board increase if the tax is repealed, he said.

"This is another example of the damaging impact this tax is having on Philadelphia families," said Anthony Campisi, a spokesman for Ax the Philly Bev Tax Coalition, made up of a number of Philadelphia businesses and residents, many of them involved in the soda industry. "It’s ironic that a tax the mayor sold on the basis of expanding educational access is now going to be making higher ed less affordable for students."

Of course, Philadelphia"s Mayor, who has come under fairly constant attack for the controversial tax, said that Temple is simply using his legislation as a scapegoat to "pay for their ever-growing administrative salaries and new, expensive buildings and amenities."

"The beverage tax is becoming a popular scapegoat for unpopular decisions," said spokeswoman Lauren Hitt. "Universities across the country have been raising meal-plan fees because families are increasingly chafing at tuition increases, and universities still want to pay for their ever-growing administrative salaries and new, expensive buildings and amenities."

"Temple"s own administration staff has grown by 40 percent in recent years; they are planning to build a multimillion-dollar stadium; their new 24-story dorm includes flat screen TVs; and, sure enough, they have a history of raising their meal-plan fees to cover those costs - by 2.5 percent in 2015 and 4.3 percent in 2014."

As we pointed out a couple of weeks ago, when Philadelphia became the first US city to pass a soda tax last summer, city officials were eagerly looking forward to the surplus-tax funded windfall to plug gaping budget deficits (and, since this is Philadelphia, the occasional embezzlement scheme). Then, after the tax went into effect on January 1st we showed the tax applied in practice: a receipt for a 10 pack of flavored water carried a 51% beverage tax. And since  PA has a sales tax of 6% and Philly already charges another 2%, the total sales tax was 8%. In other words, a purchase which until last year came to $6.47 had overnight become $9.75.

Then came the layoffs as soda sales slumped as much as 40% forcing Pepsi to lay off 80 to 100 workers at three distribution plants that serve Philly. And since Pepsi only employed 423 people in the city, it meant that as much as 20% of its employees were suddenly out of a job due to a disastrous ordnance that was meant to provide additional municipal funding and instead will now lead to an increase in unemployment, coupled with a general decline in consumption, not to mention tax revenues for the city of Philadelphia.

A spokesman for Pepsi said "The layoffs come in response to the  beverage tax, which has cut sales by 40 percent in the city...Unfortunately, after careful consideration of the economic realities created by the recently enacted beverage tax, we have been forced to give notice that we intend to eliminate 80 to 100 positions, including frontline and supervisory roles."

But not to worry, we"re sure Philly students can just take out more student loans to cover these increased costs...we certainly wouldn"t want them to have to divert any portion of their student loans that they"ve already set aside for Cancun.

Conspiracy Theory Confirmed: Secret Docs Show Gov’t Covered Up Cell Phone Cancer Risks for Years

After years hidden from the public, California Department of Public Health officials have finally released a draft document outlining health concerns stemming from cellphone radiation — including multiple cancers and infertility.

“We have evidence of brain tumors and other head and neck tumors. We also have evidence of sperm damage in males, infertility in females,” explained Joel Moskowitz of U.C. Berkeley’s School of Public Health, who sued the state in 2016 under the California Public Records Act to obtain the information.

Although the Department of Public Health ultimately chose not to publish the document — both pages have since been emblazoned with “Draft and Not for Public Release” — its content is of critical import to cellphone users around the planet.

San Francisco affiliate ABC7 reports, “Moskowitz says there’s been a lot of pressure from the wireless industry to keep any kind of negative report on cellphones hidden from the public,” and, he notes,

“[T]hey’ve done a very good job at it, essentially following the same playbook that the tobacco industry used.”

Moskowitz’ conclusion seems apt. Despite the matter-of-fact tone with which the nature of cellphone health threats is presented, the document — appropriately titled “Cell Phones and Health” — reads more like a checklist for phone usage.

Following several simple guidelines parsed out by health officials could help prevent the development of brain and other cancers, as well as other afflictions. In fact, basic protocols like holding the phone at a distance, switching to speakerphone, or, most preferably, using headphones for conversations can all help reduce risk.

And CDPH’s Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control believes sufficient reason exists to be concerned, as the document states,

“Cell phones, like other electronic devices, emit a kind of energy called radiofrequency EMFs (electromagnetic fields). Health officials are concerned about possible health effects from cell phone EMFs because some recent studies suggest that long-term cell phone use may increase the risk of brain cancer and other health problems […]

“Several studies have found that people with certain kinds of brain cancer were more likely to have used cell phones for 10 years or more. Most of the cancers were on the same side of the head that people usually held their phones. Although the chance of developing brain cancer is very small, these studies suggest that regular cell phone use increases the risk of developing some kinds of brain cancer. Some studies have also linked exposure to EMFs from cell phones to fertility problems. As more studies are done and we learn about possible risks for cancer and other health problems linked to cell phone use, the recommendations on this fact sheet may change.”

Where the government chose a painfully neutral tone to discuss the gravity of possible side effects, others have been warning about the perils of cellphones for years.

“People need to know, people are unaware that cellphones as they are used now are not safe,” Ellie Marks of the California Brain Tumor Association, told ABC7.

Environmental Working Group (EWG) eight years ago released its own set of guidelines for safer cellphone operation, as well as a review of studies on cellphone radiation, including one from the “World Health Organization that linked cell phone radiation to brain cancer, and other studies that linked cell phone radiation to diminished sperm count and sperm damage.”

EWB reports officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deny succumbing to pressure from the mobile phone industry — but nonetheless, the information in the health document could have been put to better use with a full, public release. As EWB continues,

“In human epidemiological studies, cell phone use has been linked to an increased risk of brain and salivary gland cancers. Studies from teams of scientists in several nations have raised troubling questions about possible associations between heavy cell phone use and altered brain metabolism, sleep disturbance, and even diminished sperm count and sperm damage. In 2011, the World Health Organization declared cell phone radiation a possible carcinogen.

READ MORE:  After Mentioning Hillary"s Health, Dr. Drew Got "Scary, Creepy" Calls from "Mafia" CNN, Told to Retract Comments

“Animal studies support the findings in people. A multi-year study from the U.S. National Toxicology Program found that male rats exposed to radio-frequency radiation from before birth through two years of age had a greater chance of being diagnosed with a brain cancer called malignant glioma, as well as developing a tumor found on the heart. The radiation levels to which the rats were exposed included levels that current cell phones are allowed to emit.”

EWB emphasizes more research and study must occur before the extent of risks from cellphones can be fully assessed, but cautioned sufficient evidence has been found in previous studies to be trepidatious about current FCC rules regarding the ubiquitous devices.

In the meantime, CDC and California health officials continue calling for further research — without releasing guidelines that offer at least minimal guidance for the least risky use of a cellphone.

“This could have perhaps saved some lives if it had been published by the department seven years ago,” Moskowitz lamented. “It’s disconcerting it has taken so long to issue this. And still, they are making it clear this isn’t their official position.”

CDPH cell phone document April 2014

Gov’t Pressures Doctors To Ask: ‘Do You Own A Gun?’

Image source: Wikimedia

BOSTON — Your doctor might ask if you own a gun and lecture you on firearm safety if the state attorney general and the Massachusetts Medical Society get their way.

“Gun violence is a major public health threat and physicians can play a key role in curbing the violence by educating patients about the risks of gun ownership and encouraging our colleagues to talk to their patients,” James Gessner, the president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, told reporters Monday. “We are honored to work with the Attorney General and law enforcement officials in efforts to make gun ownership safer and reduce deaths and injuries attributable to guns.”

Gessner and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, a Democrat, unveiled an initiative designed to have doctors ask patients about gun ownership. It is part of a partnership between Healey’s office and the Massachusetts Medical Society.

“While the vast majority of gun owners are responsible and deeply committed to gun safety, this remains a public health issue, and conversations between patients and health care providers are critically important to preventing gun-related injury and death,” Healey said.

Be Prepared. Learn The Best Ways To Hide Your Guns.

Image source: Pixabay.com

The program has the support of two groups representing the states’ police chiefs.

“Many households in our country have guns, but they can cause harm if not handled properly,” said Chief James DiGianvittorio, president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association. “We require the bearer of a license to carry a permit to take required safety course, however, many times other family members have no formal training. This program will at the very least open the door to conversations between physicians and patients on the risk factors associated with firearms-related injuries.”

Under the proposed policy, doctors would not report gun owners to cops. Instead, they would simply talk to them about gun safety.

“That’s why Boston Medical Center is so pleased to participate in the development of this training to help physicians talk to their patients about the safe handling and storage of guns. As a health care community, we are fully committed to ending gun violence in Massachusetts, starting in every home, and in every doctor’s visit,” said Kate Walsh, the president and CEO of Boston Medical Center.

The first step in the program will be to distribute pamphlets telling doctors about gun safety, a press release from Healey’s office stated.

“Most medical professionals believe that they can have an important role in preventing gun-related injury and death, and yet screening and counseling about guns remain uncommon,” Healey said.

The goal, she said, is to prevent gun-related accidents, self-harm and violence.

What is your reaction? Share your thoughts in the section below:

Learn To Make Your Own Ammo! Read More Here.

Illinois Lawmakers Consider Massive, Regressive Tax Hike On Low-Income Families (a.k.a "Soda Tax")

To our complete lack of surprise, lawmakers in the State of Illinois are considering following in the footsteps of Philadelphia by imposing a 1 cent per ounce "soda tax" on all sugary beverages.

And while it"s being done under the guise of "improving public health," precisely zero people believe that the Nanny State of Illinois cares about the sugar intake of its residents.  Of course, the real motivation behind the so-called "soda taxes" springing up in liberal bastions across the country is the $100"s of million of tax dollars than can be generated to help them grow the Nanny State even bigger.

Lets look at a quick example of how the tax dollars add up.  Lets say, just for fun, that the average person consumes one, 12 ounce, sugary beverage (soda, juice,  etc.) per day.  That would equate to roughly a $45 annual tax per person (12 ounces x 365 days x $0.01 per ounce).  Multiply that by a family of 4 and the annual tax per household is $180 or roughly 30 bps of the median Illinois household income of $60,000. 

And while that doesn"t sound like much, and obviously it was designed that way, the numbers are staggering when you start to consider the statewide revenue potential.  Applying the the $45 per person annual tax from above to Illinois" 13 million people implies that the total revenue potential for state coffers is $585mm.  And, before you ask, while we understand that most infants aren"t drinking a can of Dr. Pepper on the reg (although we are talking about Chicago so who knows), we also guess that most teenagers are drinking more than one sugary drink per day so just go along with our rough math here.

Of course, as the Daily Caller pointed out, Philadelphia residents have been shocked by the impact of the soda tax on their grocery bills.  And even though Mayor Jim Kenney would like for you to believe that local businesses are responsible for the cost of a 12-pack of soda doubling overnight, we suspect most Philly voters are slightly smarter than that.

Consumers are in shock at price hikes on sugary beverages across Philadelphia due to a Soda tax that took effect Jan 1, and now the mayor is blaming increased costs on businesses.

Mayor Jim Kenney, who lead the charge for the passage of the tax, is lashing out at the business community over higher prices, even alleging retailers of attempting to stir resentment for the tax in the community. Kenney is accusing retailers of price gouging, purposefully constructed to undermine the tax and the efforts of the local government. Retailers who are charging the tax as a separate line item or who are putting up signs specifically highlighting the cost of the tax to the consumer, are engaging in an attempt to “mislead” shoppers and are “wrong,” according to Kenney, reports CBS Philly.

The contentious soda tax secured passage in June but consumers in Philadelphia are still flabbergasted by the price increases the tax is sparking. In some cases, shoppers found that they were paying more for the soda tax than the actual product they are purchasing.

Some residents said they are going to start shopping for their beverages out of the city to avoid the onerous tax. The mayor continues to defended the tax, arguing it is the choice of the retailers to pass the added costs onto their customers, deflecting responsibility. Prices are as much as doubling on certain products due to the tax. A 12-pack of Lipton Diet Green Tea at a Save-A-Lot in the city is now priced at $8.03, instead the $4.99 it costed in December.

Meanwhile, as we pointed out back in November (see "Startling Look At How Much Money Food Stamp Recipients Spend On Junk Food"), food stamp recipients spend over $350 million per year on "soft drinks."  So, lets assume conservatively that people pay, on average $1 per 12 oz can of soda.  That would imply that food stamp recipients are consuming 4.2 billion ounces of soda per year which means that $42mm of your federal tax dollars could be going to fund soda taxes in a Nanny State near you in the not too distant future...enjoy that thought over you long weekend.