Keon Coleman Bills press conference
- By RayRay3454
- Off Topic
- 9 Replies
Keon Coleman Begins Bills Tenure With Incredibly Entertaining Press Conference
The former Florida State receiver left quite the first impression.
www.si.com
Hate to admit I kinda like the former player now.
The Good News: New treatment for melanoma enters Phase 3 trials
- By Joes Place
- Off Topic
- 4 Replies
The Bad News: It requires up to 9 'jabs' of an mRNA vaccine, custom made for each patient.
Sorry MAGAs, you'll have to wait for some other future therapy in the meantime...
Reduced risk of recurrence by half over 3 years.
www.theguardian.com
Dr Heather Shaw, the national coordinating investigator for the trial, said the jabs had the potential to cure people with melanoma and are being tested in other cancers, including lung, bladder and kidney.
“This is one of the most exciting things we’ve seen in a really long time,” said Shaw. “This is a really finely honed tool. To be able to sit there and say to your patients that you’re offering them something that’s effectively like the Fat Duck at Bray versus McDonald’s – it’s that level of cordon bleu that’s coming to them … The patients are really excited about them.”
The vaccine is an individualised neoantigen therapy. It is designed to trigger the immune system so it can fight back against a patient’s specific type of cancer and tumour.
Known as mRNA-4157 (V940), the vaccine targets tumour neoantigens, which are expressed by tumours in a particular patient. These are markers on the tumour that can potentially be recognised by the immune system.
Generalized to other tumors, doctors are claiming it could provide a cure for many other cancers, as well.
Sorry MAGAs, you'll have to wait for some other future therapy in the meantime...
Reduced risk of recurrence by half over 3 years.
‘Real hope’ for cancer cure as personal mRNA vaccine for melanoma trialled
Excitement among patients and researchers as custom-built jabs enter phase 3 trial
Dr Heather Shaw, the national coordinating investigator for the trial, said the jabs had the potential to cure people with melanoma and are being tested in other cancers, including lung, bladder and kidney.
“This is one of the most exciting things we’ve seen in a really long time,” said Shaw. “This is a really finely honed tool. To be able to sit there and say to your patients that you’re offering them something that’s effectively like the Fat Duck at Bray versus McDonald’s – it’s that level of cordon bleu that’s coming to them … The patients are really excited about them.”
The vaccine is an individualised neoantigen therapy. It is designed to trigger the immune system so it can fight back against a patient’s specific type of cancer and tumour.
Known as mRNA-4157 (V940), the vaccine targets tumour neoantigens, which are expressed by tumours in a particular patient. These are markers on the tumour that can potentially be recognised by the immune system.
Generalized to other tumors, doctors are claiming it could provide a cure for many other cancers, as well.
I've been at NPR 25 years - Here's how we lost people's trust
- By Colonoscopy
- Off Topic
- 131 Replies
I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.
Uri Berliner, a veteran at the public radio institution, says the network lost its way when it started telling listeners how to think.
www.thefp.com
Court order moves fatal crew club lawsuit against ISU to trial next week
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
A former faculty adviser and a former coach for the embattled Iowa State University crew club — which three years ago came under scrutiny after two students drowned during a club activity — are “immune from personal liability” and have been dropped from a lawsuit scheduled for trial next week.
A Story County judge agreed with the defendants — Iowa State, the State of Iowa, former ISU Assistant Director for Sports Clubs in Recreation Services John Wolfe, former faculty adviser Jeffrey Iles, and former club coach Dustin Gentry — on that portion of their request for summary judgment, seeking a court order negating the need for the May 7 trial.
But the judge in her April 26 decision denied the summary judgment request for the rest of the defendants — including the State of Iowa and Iowa State — agreeing with the family of 20-year-old Yaakov Ben-David, one of the students who died on March 28, 2021, that “summary judgment is not proper.”
"The defendants attempt to disclaim any duty of care associated with the March 28 water practice in isolation, arguing that they did nothing to expose Mr. Ben-David to a risk of physical harm he would not have otherwise faced by getting on the water that day,“ according to the judge’s order. ”The court is not convinced.“
Ben-David’s parents, Eric and Sarah Ben-David, of New Jersey, filed their initial lawsuit Nov. 1, 2022, and then added on defendants Iles and Gentry in January 2024.
Family members of the other student who died in the crew club capsizing on Little Wall Lake three years ago — Derek Nanni, 19, of Normal, Ill. — settled their wrongful death claim with the state in December 2022 for $2 million.
With a last-minute settlement in the Ben-David case unlikely, and at least part of Iowa State’s request for summary judgment denied, a trial in Story County next week appears imminent.
“Despite the defendants’ attempts to distance themselves from the crew club, it was not just a random group of adults from Ames, Iowa, who chose to form a group and go rowing off-campus,” the judge wrote in her order. “Instead, it was a school sanctioned club subject to certain written policies and procedures — including certain ISU employees being specifically assigned to be responsible for safety training, approval of off-campus travel, and other related matters.
“A reasonable jury could find that the defendants could have reasonably foreseen harm to Mr. Ben-David in engaging in a crew club practice without any life jackets or safety training, particularly in light of the crew club raising these exact concerns to the ISU employees more than a year earlier.”
The case stems from a series of events — outlined in the lawsuit — culminating on a frigid and gusty March morning, when the ISU crew club had planned a water practice.
Two years earlier, a former club president had emailed Director Wolfe warning him the group had been out of compliance with USRowing safety protocols for years and needed a dock, launch boat with life jackets, and mandatory swim tests.
Other than the swim tests, no action was taken to address the safety concerns — and Ben-David joined the group a year later in early 2021. He had never rowed in open water, but passed the swim test March 18. Ten days later, he arrived with several others at 7:30 a.m. for a practice — absent coach Gentry.
“Weather conditions that morning violated USRowing’s safety rules and the crew club’s constitution,” according to the lawsuit, which reported, “student members had never been properly trained in the appropriate reaction to a capsize event.”
So when the boat did capsize that morning, the students left it and tried to swim to shore — even as training would have taught them to stay with the boat. Ben-David and Naani both drowned, two members were rescued from the water, and a fifth successfully swam to shore.
Unaware of the capsizing, a second group with the club opted not to go out later — due to the weather.
In suing the state, school, and several leaders involved in the club, Ben-David’s family alleged six counts — including wrongful death, reckless conduct and negligence.
In weighing the state and Iowa State’s push for summary judgment in their favor, the judge considered first their argument for entitled immunity — and denied it — finding they "failed to demonstrate as a matter of law that their inaction in the face of contrary policies and known dangers to their students was the type of judgment the legislature intended to shield from immunity.“
To the argument Iowa State didn’t owe the students “a special duty to supervise and oversee the ISU crew club and its activities,” they maintained all decisions that put Ben-David in harm’s way that day “were made by Mr. Ben-David and the other student club members.”
“They claim they did not control the overall decision to row that morning and that the crew club made all decisions that day, including whether to practice at all, when, where, how, and who would practice.”
But the court again was dissuaded by that argument.
“The main thrust of the defendants’ argument appears to be that, because they completely abdicated their obligations to provide any safety training and oversight to the crew club, the adult students engaging in an off-campus activity on March 28 did not rely on the defendants’ (lack of) safety training and oversight that day, so therefore the defendants had no duty to prevent injuries or death resulting from untrained students engaging in the activities,” according to the court order.
“Suffice it to say, the record contains a more complete picture than that put forth by the defendants, beginning with the crew club reaching out over one year before the March 28 water practice, alerting the defendants to safety concerns and requests.”
Given the volunteer status of the faculty adviser and club coach, however, both Iles and Gentry were found to be immune from personal liability and dismissed from the case.
www.thegazette.com
A Story County judge agreed with the defendants — Iowa State, the State of Iowa, former ISU Assistant Director for Sports Clubs in Recreation Services John Wolfe, former faculty adviser Jeffrey Iles, and former club coach Dustin Gentry — on that portion of their request for summary judgment, seeking a court order negating the need for the May 7 trial.
But the judge in her April 26 decision denied the summary judgment request for the rest of the defendants — including the State of Iowa and Iowa State — agreeing with the family of 20-year-old Yaakov Ben-David, one of the students who died on March 28, 2021, that “summary judgment is not proper.”
"The defendants attempt to disclaim any duty of care associated with the March 28 water practice in isolation, arguing that they did nothing to expose Mr. Ben-David to a risk of physical harm he would not have otherwise faced by getting on the water that day,“ according to the judge’s order. ”The court is not convinced.“
Ben-David’s parents, Eric and Sarah Ben-David, of New Jersey, filed their initial lawsuit Nov. 1, 2022, and then added on defendants Iles and Gentry in January 2024.
Family members of the other student who died in the crew club capsizing on Little Wall Lake three years ago — Derek Nanni, 19, of Normal, Ill. — settled their wrongful death claim with the state in December 2022 for $2 million.
With a last-minute settlement in the Ben-David case unlikely, and at least part of Iowa State’s request for summary judgment denied, a trial in Story County next week appears imminent.
“Despite the defendants’ attempts to distance themselves from the crew club, it was not just a random group of adults from Ames, Iowa, who chose to form a group and go rowing off-campus,” the judge wrote in her order. “Instead, it was a school sanctioned club subject to certain written policies and procedures — including certain ISU employees being specifically assigned to be responsible for safety training, approval of off-campus travel, and other related matters.
“A reasonable jury could find that the defendants could have reasonably foreseen harm to Mr. Ben-David in engaging in a crew club practice without any life jackets or safety training, particularly in light of the crew club raising these exact concerns to the ISU employees more than a year earlier.”
Wrongful death, reckless conduct
The case stems from a series of events — outlined in the lawsuit — culminating on a frigid and gusty March morning, when the ISU crew club had planned a water practice.
Two years earlier, a former club president had emailed Director Wolfe warning him the group had been out of compliance with USRowing safety protocols for years and needed a dock, launch boat with life jackets, and mandatory swim tests.
Other than the swim tests, no action was taken to address the safety concerns — and Ben-David joined the group a year later in early 2021. He had never rowed in open water, but passed the swim test March 18. Ten days later, he arrived with several others at 7:30 a.m. for a practice — absent coach Gentry.
“Weather conditions that morning violated USRowing’s safety rules and the crew club’s constitution,” according to the lawsuit, which reported, “student members had never been properly trained in the appropriate reaction to a capsize event.”
So when the boat did capsize that morning, the students left it and tried to swim to shore — even as training would have taught them to stay with the boat. Ben-David and Naani both drowned, two members were rescued from the water, and a fifth successfully swam to shore.
Unaware of the capsizing, a second group with the club opted not to go out later — due to the weather.
In suing the state, school, and several leaders involved in the club, Ben-David’s family alleged six counts — including wrongful death, reckless conduct and negligence.
‘The defendants had no duty’
In weighing the state and Iowa State’s push for summary judgment in their favor, the judge considered first their argument for entitled immunity — and denied it — finding they "failed to demonstrate as a matter of law that their inaction in the face of contrary policies and known dangers to their students was the type of judgment the legislature intended to shield from immunity.“
To the argument Iowa State didn’t owe the students “a special duty to supervise and oversee the ISU crew club and its activities,” they maintained all decisions that put Ben-David in harm’s way that day “were made by Mr. Ben-David and the other student club members.”
“They claim they did not control the overall decision to row that morning and that the crew club made all decisions that day, including whether to practice at all, when, where, how, and who would practice.”
But the court again was dissuaded by that argument.
“The main thrust of the defendants’ argument appears to be that, because they completely abdicated their obligations to provide any safety training and oversight to the crew club, the adult students engaging in an off-campus activity on March 28 did not rely on the defendants’ (lack of) safety training and oversight that day, so therefore the defendants had no duty to prevent injuries or death resulting from untrained students engaging in the activities,” according to the court order.
“Suffice it to say, the record contains a more complete picture than that put forth by the defendants, beginning with the crew club reaching out over one year before the March 28 water practice, alerting the defendants to safety concerns and requests.”
Given the volunteer status of the faculty adviser and club coach, however, both Iles and Gentry were found to be immune from personal liability and dismissed from the case.
Court order moves fatal crew club lawsuit against ISU to trial
A former faculty adviser and a former coach for the embattled Iowa State University crew club — which three years ago came under scrutiny after two students drowned during a club activity — are “immune from personal liability” and have been dropped from a lawsuit scheduled for trial next week.
www.thegazette.com
The ‘attack on Christianity’ is coming from inside the building
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
Iowa is falling further behind other states in terms of test scores, spending on public education, healthy weight, and equitable criminal justice.
But we are leading the pack for states that make certain groups feel like they no longer belong here.
Gov. Kim Reynolds stated that “religious rights have increasingly come under attack” upon signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Senate File 2095 into law. But this begs the question who is attacking religion? Is it the religious people speaking out against hateful laws, many using Scripture to show these rights are not embodied in holy texts? Or the people stirring up hate and taking away rights of others in the name of religion?
It is important to have diversity of thought and opinion. The First Amendment still is a thing. But the rights based on certain beliefs are being elevated, and this elevation is being used to erode the rights of Iowans who were born a different color or love or live differently than what is considered acceptable by dominant society.
But to be clear, the only way religion is being attacked is using it as an excuse to harm, belittle, and persecute marginalized communities.
And let’s be precise in our language, attack from their standpoint is too strong a word to describe the reality of public pushback on the seeds of hate and fear that are being sown in our state.
Proclaimed religious beliefs are now legally allowed to be used to discriminate against other protected classes. These “beliefs” are used to justify categorizing certain groups as “sinful” or worthy of discrimination on the basis of some inkling their God would want them to distance themselves from others.
For those not familiar with the term, othering is “the act of treating someone as if they are not part of a group and are different in some way.” Othering is harmful to society as it exacerbates existing social division and negatively impacts the economy in numerous ways. We have seen this with the threat of some businesses and professionals to leave our state.
All this matters, of course, to those to whom the psychological turmoil and dehumanization of Iowan’s who are othered is not enough to justify outrage.
Othering has been used to defend atrocities and oppression for centuries. Watching the suffering occurring in multiple theatres around the world, it is difficult to understand how genocide, ethnic cleansing, and the innocent civilian casualties do not tear our hearts apart. Maybe it is protective? Some shield themselves from the news or turn to other entertainment and or to the latest scandalous event as it is too much pain to process.
But what is particularly troubling is the justification for mass killing across the globe or the extreme dehumanization of our neighbors here at home, because they are different.
We can hear it in the grocery store line. During sermons at some religious institutions. On public transportation or at public restaurants. “Well, if they just …” “They struck first …” And even, “but they are just different from us, their values are not the same and they are just not right.”
Having traveled extensively, I have heard firsthand the stories of locals in other countries struggling to piece together multiple jobs to afford the most basic of housing. Housing costs have skyrocketed because wealthy foreigners, many of whom are Americans, are buying second homes or investment properties. It is OK for us to disrupt the housing markets of others, but others may not come here to seek a better life for their children. Some insist that they would be fine with immigration if the others “do it the legally,” but fail to acknowledge these laws were made by and for those who have the birthright and access to make this possible. The glaring difference from us doing it elsewhere and others trying to make their way here is that research shows that immigrants to America have a positive benefit to our society, whether they come legally or otherwise.
We are coming to the end of a golden era of American power and prosperity. If man made or natural disaster were to strike our country, what would we do? Pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and make do even when futile, or try to find a better life for our family elsewhere? Like our wealthier countrymen are already doing on foreign soil?
For those who wanted to curtail health care, specify what bathroom others can use, what sports they can play, and insist on their being outed, how would they feel if their child made the brave decision to live their authentic self as someone who would be othered? How would they handle the depression and the fear their loved one now faces in this state of intolerance?
Religious principles — and especially the teaching of Jesus — of feeding the hungry, protecting immigrants, and treating others with dignity were nowhere to be seen in many other policy decisions made this year.
The God or other religious entities that many of us grew up with hold love as the most important religious principle. In fact, the “steadfast love of the Lord never ceases; his mercies never come to an end.”
Iowa doesn’t feel like a place of steadfast love and endless mercies.
This God or any other deity must be ashamed and frustrated by acts of hate and cruelty in their name. This is the real attack on religion.
It is time for Iowa legislators and their constituents “To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.”
Chris Espersen is a Gazette editorial fellow. chris.espersen@thegazette.com
www.thegazette.com
But we are leading the pack for states that make certain groups feel like they no longer belong here.
Gov. Kim Reynolds stated that “religious rights have increasingly come under attack” upon signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Senate File 2095 into law. But this begs the question who is attacking religion? Is it the religious people speaking out against hateful laws, many using Scripture to show these rights are not embodied in holy texts? Or the people stirring up hate and taking away rights of others in the name of religion?
It is important to have diversity of thought and opinion. The First Amendment still is a thing. But the rights based on certain beliefs are being elevated, and this elevation is being used to erode the rights of Iowans who were born a different color or love or live differently than what is considered acceptable by dominant society.
But to be clear, the only way religion is being attacked is using it as an excuse to harm, belittle, and persecute marginalized communities.
And let’s be precise in our language, attack from their standpoint is too strong a word to describe the reality of public pushback on the seeds of hate and fear that are being sown in our state.
Proclaimed religious beliefs are now legally allowed to be used to discriminate against other protected classes. These “beliefs” are used to justify categorizing certain groups as “sinful” or worthy of discrimination on the basis of some inkling their God would want them to distance themselves from others.
For those not familiar with the term, othering is “the act of treating someone as if they are not part of a group and are different in some way.” Othering is harmful to society as it exacerbates existing social division and negatively impacts the economy in numerous ways. We have seen this with the threat of some businesses and professionals to leave our state.
All this matters, of course, to those to whom the psychological turmoil and dehumanization of Iowan’s who are othered is not enough to justify outrage.
Othering has been used to defend atrocities and oppression for centuries. Watching the suffering occurring in multiple theatres around the world, it is difficult to understand how genocide, ethnic cleansing, and the innocent civilian casualties do not tear our hearts apart. Maybe it is protective? Some shield themselves from the news or turn to other entertainment and or to the latest scandalous event as it is too much pain to process.
But what is particularly troubling is the justification for mass killing across the globe or the extreme dehumanization of our neighbors here at home, because they are different.
We can hear it in the grocery store line. During sermons at some religious institutions. On public transportation or at public restaurants. “Well, if they just …” “They struck first …” And even, “but they are just different from us, their values are not the same and they are just not right.”
Having traveled extensively, I have heard firsthand the stories of locals in other countries struggling to piece together multiple jobs to afford the most basic of housing. Housing costs have skyrocketed because wealthy foreigners, many of whom are Americans, are buying second homes or investment properties. It is OK for us to disrupt the housing markets of others, but others may not come here to seek a better life for their children. Some insist that they would be fine with immigration if the others “do it the legally,” but fail to acknowledge these laws were made by and for those who have the birthright and access to make this possible. The glaring difference from us doing it elsewhere and others trying to make their way here is that research shows that immigrants to America have a positive benefit to our society, whether they come legally or otherwise.
We are coming to the end of a golden era of American power and prosperity. If man made or natural disaster were to strike our country, what would we do? Pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and make do even when futile, or try to find a better life for our family elsewhere? Like our wealthier countrymen are already doing on foreign soil?
For those who wanted to curtail health care, specify what bathroom others can use, what sports they can play, and insist on their being outed, how would they feel if their child made the brave decision to live their authentic self as someone who would be othered? How would they handle the depression and the fear their loved one now faces in this state of intolerance?
Religious principles — and especially the teaching of Jesus — of feeding the hungry, protecting immigrants, and treating others with dignity were nowhere to be seen in many other policy decisions made this year.
The God or other religious entities that many of us grew up with hold love as the most important religious principle. In fact, the “steadfast love of the Lord never ceases; his mercies never come to an end.”
Iowa doesn’t feel like a place of steadfast love and endless mercies.
This God or any other deity must be ashamed and frustrated by acts of hate and cruelty in their name. This is the real attack on religion.
It is time for Iowa legislators and their constituents “To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.”
Chris Espersen is a Gazette editorial fellow. chris.espersen@thegazette.com
Opinion: The ‘attack on Christianity’ is coming from inside the building
The only way religion is being attacked is using it as an excuse to harm, belittle, and persecute marginalized communities
www.thegazette.com
EEOC files lawsuit against moving company for trying to hire people who are physically able to move furniture...
- Off Topic
- 9 Replies
Uncle Sam wants YOU … to hire Grandpa as a piano lugger.
Or else.
That’s the latest madness from the federal government’s woke bowels: an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawsuit against Fresno-based Meathead Movers after the company refused to comply with a demand for a $15 million settlement.
Meathead’s crime?
“Discouragement bias,” i.e., the claim that hiring student-athletes of both genders in tip-top shape as movers and touting that fact in ads somehow discourages older people from applying for jobs.
First: Are AARP members really queuing up to get gigs as movers?
We understand that Bidenomics has ruined a lot of people’s retirements, but that seems … dubious.
Especially since the lawsuit isn’t even based on a specific complaint.
Not one, when the EEOC saw 70,000-plus workplace discrimination complaints last year alone.
In other words, the feds “discovered” some nonexistent violation of employment law and then went to the mattresses with a moving firm, initially demanding the eight-figure settlement (With whom, exactly? All the people who didn’t complain?) before dropping to a more “reasonable” figure close to $5 million.
Meathead even made a good-faith counteroffer in the face of this blatant extortion; the EEOC refused to take it and later filed suit.
And while Meathead has insanely been on fed radar since 2017, the big push here clearly comes from Charlotte Burrows, President Biden’s pick to head the EEOC.
She’s a congenital wokist who has vowed to crack down on age discrimination.
Even, it seems, where none exists.
A moving company using pics of ripped young employees in ads doesn’t discourage older people from trying to work there — it’s a sales technique, and it’s clearly effective.
And there’s zero hiring discrimination: “We are 100% open to hiring anyone at any age if they can do the job,” as the company’s head put it.
Indeed, we suspect game legs and twingey lower backs are the real discouragement for mature folks here.
Yet to our out-of-control feds, this thriving and socially valuable firm is just an opportunity for blackmail:
"Nice small business you got there, be a shame if something happened to it."
nypost.com
Or else.
That’s the latest madness from the federal government’s woke bowels: an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawsuit against Fresno-based Meathead Movers after the company refused to comply with a demand for a $15 million settlement.
Meathead’s crime?
“Discouragement bias,” i.e., the claim that hiring student-athletes of both genders in tip-top shape as movers and touting that fact in ads somehow discourages older people from applying for jobs.
First: Are AARP members really queuing up to get gigs as movers?
We understand that Bidenomics has ruined a lot of people’s retirements, but that seems … dubious.
Especially since the lawsuit isn’t even based on a specific complaint.
Not one, when the EEOC saw 70,000-plus workplace discrimination complaints last year alone.
In other words, the feds “discovered” some nonexistent violation of employment law and then went to the mattresses with a moving firm, initially demanding the eight-figure settlement (With whom, exactly? All the people who didn’t complain?) before dropping to a more “reasonable” figure close to $5 million.
Meathead even made a good-faith counteroffer in the face of this blatant extortion; the EEOC refused to take it and later filed suit.
And while Meathead has insanely been on fed radar since 2017, the big push here clearly comes from Charlotte Burrows, President Biden’s pick to head the EEOC.
She’s a congenital wokist who has vowed to crack down on age discrimination.
Even, it seems, where none exists.
A moving company using pics of ripped young employees in ads doesn’t discourage older people from trying to work there — it’s a sales technique, and it’s clearly effective.
And there’s zero hiring discrimination: “We are 100% open to hiring anyone at any age if they can do the job,” as the company’s head put it.
Indeed, we suspect game legs and twingey lower backs are the real discouragement for mature folks here.
Yet to our out-of-control feds, this thriving and socially valuable firm is just an opportunity for blackmail:
"Nice small business you got there, be a shame if something happened to it."
Fed lawsuit: Hire old people for heavy manual labor — or else!
The Equal Employment Opportunity Comission is suing Meathead Movers for “discouragement bias” because not enough old people work there. The feds are totally out of control on this one; …
nypost.com
