The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that pro-life doctors do not have standing to challenge the Food and Drug Administration’s removal of safety restrictions on abortion drugs. The court issued a unanimous ruling in two combined cases that deal with the FDA’s regulation of abortion drugs, FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine and Danco Laboratories LLC v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court, in which he wrote that even though the plaintiffs have “sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections to elective abortion and to the FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone,” because they do not prescribe or use the abortion drug mifepristone, and the FDA is not requiring them to “do or refrain from doing anything,” “the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.” “In 2016 and 2021, the Food and Drug Administration relaxed its regulatory requirements for mifepristone, an abortion drug,” the justice said. “Those changes made it easier for doctors to prescribe and pregnant women to obtain mifepristone.” “Several pro-life doctors and associations sued FDA, arguing that FDA’s actions violated the Administrative Procedure Act,” he continued. “But the plaintiffs do not prescribe or use mifepristone. And FDA is not requiring them to do or refrain from doing anything.” “Rather, the plaintiffs want FDA to make mifepristone more difficult for other doctors to prescribe and for pregnant women to obtain,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Under Article III of the Constitution, a plaintiff ’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice. Therefore, the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions.” Justice Clarence Thomas emphasized in his concurring opinion that the ruling is all about standing, noting that the opinion is in line with his dissent in June Medical Services v. Russo. “Just as abortionists lack standing to assert the rights of their clients, doctors who oppose abortion cannot vicariously assert the rights of their patients,” he wrote. The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is a group of medical professionals committed to upholding “the fundamental principles of Hippocratic medicine,” including “protecting the vulnerable at the beginning and end of life, seeking the ultimate good for the patient with compassion and moral integrity, and providing health care with the highest standards of excellence based on medical science.” These medical professionals were represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). “Women should have the ongoing care of a doctor when taking high-risk drugs,” ADF senior counsel Erin Hawley, who argued the case before the Supreme Court, said in March. “The FDA betrayed women and girls when it removed the necessary in-person doctor visits that protected women’s health and well-being.” “The FDA’s own label for abortion drugs says that roughly one in 25 women who take them will end up in the emergency room,” added Hawley, who is married to Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo. “Yet, the government continues to defend its reckless actions that jeopardize women’s health and safety.” The drug central to the case is the abortion drug mifepristone, first approved by the FDA in 2000 as part of a two-part drug combo with misoprostol to abort babies very early on in pregnancy. The FDA had formerly required a slew of safety restrictions, such as requiring that only a doctor could dispense mifepristone, that the mother would have to get the abortion drugs in person, and that the mother could only abort her baby using abortion drugs up until the seventh week of pregnancy. Moms also would have to make three visits to the doctor to get the drugs: the first to take mifepristone, the second to take misoprostol, and the third to confirm that the baby was dead. In 2016, the FDA eliminated requirements for the doctors who prescribe mifepristone to report “adverse events,” or nonfatal complications that ensued from the abortion drugs—meaning, that unless a mother dies, the abortionists don’t have to report complications from the drugs. ADF has argued that that further obscures “the truth” about abortion drugs. Also in 2016, the FDA also reduced the number of required doctors office visits for women getting abortion drugs from three to one, and it stopped requiring doctors prescribe the abortion drugs. And in 2021, the FDA stopped requiring that abortion drugs be dispensed to mothers in person, which allowed women to receive them through telehealth appointments and by mail—though the agency had explicitly warned that abortion drugs should not be purchased over the internet “because they will bypass important safeguards designed to protect their health.” (That language has since been removed from the FDA’s website.) The ruling comes just short of two years after the Supreme Court ruled, in Dobbs vs. Jackson Health Women’s Organization, the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022. In a statement following the decision, Heritage Foundation legal fellows Thomas Jipping and Melanie Israel emphasized that the decision is “not the final judgement on the safety or effectiveness of mifepristone.” “While legal technicalities might allow Biden’s FDA to continue manipulating its safety rules to push a pro-abortion agenda at the expense of health and common sense, women and girls taking these chemical abortion drugs are still in danger and largely left to fend for themselves,” Jipping and Israel said. They added: “Policymakers should be on the side of women’s safety by, at a minimum, demanding that the FDA follow its own original safety guidelines, not give abortion drugs a pass because of radical abortion ideology.”      This is a breaking news story that will be updated. The post BREAKING: Supreme Court Delivers Procedural Ruling On Abortion Drugs appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Question of the Day: 'Pro-Palestinian Protest' or Terrorist Crime Scene?

Shhhhhh...You Can't Talk About THAT!

Amongst the super-rich, it’s almost a requirement at this point to try some wacky way of halting the irrepressible march of time. Anti-aging strategies range from the positively vanilla – drink lots of water and wear sunscreen – to the still-quite-tame cosmetic surgery options, to the extremely expensive and bizarre (penis rejuvenation, anyone?). But what if all you had to do was take a quick trip into space? A package of new papers is giving us our most detailed look yet at what happens to the human body during short-term spaceflight. Samples collected from the first all-civilian crew of SpaceX’s Inspiration4 mission have been analyzed, as we approach the third anniversary of the mission’s return from a successful few days orbiting the Earth at a height of 575 kilometers (357 miles) – that’s about 160 kilometers (99 miles) further away than the ISS. While the crew was in orbit, they gathered copious scientific data, including blood and skin swab samples from their own bodies, overseen by the mission’s chief medical officer and physician assistant Hayley Arceneaux. The crew spent much of their time in orbit conducting science experiments.Image credit: SpaceX/Inspiration4Scientists at over 100 institutions across more than 25 countries have worked together to coordinate the analysis effort since the mission’s splashdown, culminating in the recent publication of the Space Omics and Medical Atlas (SOMA) package, which also comprises data from a variety of other missions like the NASA Twins Study.“Civilian participants have different educational backgrounds and medical conditions compared to astronauts with career-long exposure to spaceflight. Understanding their physiological and psychological responses to spaceflight and their ability to conduct research is of utmost importance as we continue to send more private astronauts into space,” explained Dr Emmanuel Urquieta, chief medical officer at the Translational Research Institute for Space Health (TRISH), in a statement.Amongst the wealth of interesting results, some of the most striking findings concerned what happened to the astronauts’ DNA.Telomeres, DNA, and cellular agingEvery crewmember experienced lengthening of their telomeres during the flight. Telomeres are the protective caps on the ends of chromosomes, which get shorter during our lives as our bodies’ cells undergo continuous cycles of replication. Eventually, the telomeres become so short that they lose their protective power.Telomere shortening is a signal that a cell is reaching the end of its useful life and a hallmark of cellular senescence – itself intrinsic to the aging process. For a long time, scientists have been experimenting with ways of boosting longevity by slowing telomere shortening.Since the Inspiration4 crew all showed evidence of telomere lengthening during their brief sojourn into the cosmos, it can be said that they got genetically “younger” during the mission. “It's really a remarkable finding in a number of ways and helps us solidify our findings,” commented Susan Bailey, a professor at Colorado State University, in a press briefing discussing the research.In case any multimillionaires out there are already picking up the phone to Elon Musk to secure their spot on the next mission, we should let you know that this telomere lengthening was unfortunately temporary. Not only do they shrink again when you’re back on terra firma, they actually end up shorter than before.“It's one of the things that doesn't quite get back to where you were when you started,” said Bailey. “We think that there is a real opportunity to think about long-term health outcomes for astronauts once they return to Earth and how we can better monitor and improve that outcome.”So, for the full Benjamin Button experience, you’d probably need to be thinking about settling in space for the long haul, rather than just a weekend mini-break. The same telomere lengthening was previously observed in NASA astronaut Scott Kelly after his one-year stint in orbit back in 2015. At the time, this was a huge surprise to scientists, who presumed that the stress of a space mission would have the opposite effect.“We think it's the DNA's equivalent to hormesis,” professor of genomics, physiology, and biophysics Chris Mason told Space.com. “It's the effect that we see when you stress the body, for example in the gym, your muscles get sore, but the body responds by building strength.”The mission's chief medical officer, Hayley Arceneaux, is a trained physician assistant and bone cancer survivor. She became the first human in space with a prosthetic leg when she flew with Inspiration4.Image credit: Inspiration4 crewBut again, any positive effect on telomeres comes with a whole host of tradeoffs in the rest of the body. Inevitable exposure to radiation in space can damage DNA unless countermeasures are imposed, something the SOMA data is helping scientists explore. There are immune system changes to contend with, a small percentage of which appear to persist for at least three months when astronauts return to Earth. Another of the studies in the collection found alarming evidence that lengthy space travel can permanently damage the kidneys, meaning that unless protective treatment is given, any future Mars colonizers will only be making it back home if their ships are equipped with dialysis machines.We also know that time in orbit has some impact on the cardiovascular system, even in the short-term, which seems to be highly variable between people. That’s before you even get to the psychological implications – it’s not for everyone. Space physiology studies like this are always limited by sample size – the Inspiration4 crew numbered only four individuals – which is another reason why the accumulated data in the SOMA package makes it such a valuable resource. “Frequent space travel is on the horizon and more commercial spaceflight participants are eager to venture forward,” said TRISH’s executive director Dr Dorit Donoviel. “We must plan appropriately and ensure scientific research in space is performed as accurately and safely for everyone.”    Time in space does make you – temporarily – genetically younger. The rest of your body, on the other hand, might be aging even faster. And your DNA is just going to immediately age back up again as soon as you return to Earth. All things considered, if Benjamin Button-ing is your thing, and until we have Starfleet levels of medical tech at our disposal, perhaps it’s worth getting back to basics with some good ol’ water and sunscreen. The SOMA package of papers has been compiled into a Nature collection, accessible here.  

In Greek mythology, the island of Crete provides the setting for a legendary battle between the heroic Theseus and the half-human, half-bull monstrosity known as the Minotaur, which is said to have lived inside a maddening labyrinth. And while there’s little truth to this fable, archaeologists have just discovered a monumental labyrinthine structure atop a Cretan hill.According to a statement from the Greek Ministry of Culture, the unusual construction is the first of its kind to be discovered in Crete and was likely built by the Minoans between 2000 and 1700 BCE. Often regarded as the first true civilization in Europe, the Bronze Age Minoan culture is famed for its monumental palaces and innovative writing system.The newly discovered labyrinth is located at an altitude of 494 meters (1,621 feet), at the summit of Papoura Hill, and was found during the installation of a radar system for a new airport servicing the town of Kastelli. Officials have announced that the construction of the airport will still go ahead, but that a new location will be found for the radar equipment so that the ancient site can be excavated and protected.Consisting of eight concentric circular walls – with an average thickness of 1.4 meters (4.6 feet) – the unusual structure measures 48 meters (157 feet) across and covers a total of 1,800 square meters (19,375 square feet), with the maximum height of the surviving walls estimated at 1.7 meters (5.6 feet). The labyrinth is divided into four zones by a series of radial walls that intersect the various rings, while small openings act as passageways between these sections.At the center of the labyrinth is a circular building, which is also divided into four quadrants. According to the Ministry of Culture, the full layout and total height of the confusing structure remain unknown, but will hopefully be revealed as excavation work continues.The labyrinth's monumental size and prominent location hint at its symbolic importance.Image credit: Greek Ministry of CultureIn all likelihood, the site was built around the time that the very first Minoan palaces were erected. Based on the distribution of animal bones within the inner rings of the maze, experts believe it probably served as a ceremonial space where rituals involving offerings and feasts were conducted.Despite the temptation to draw parallels between this stunning discovery and the mythological lair of the Minotaur, it’s highly unlikely that the two are connected. For one thing, the hideous bull-man creature is said to have lived in an underground labyrinth in the ancient town of Knossos, so the locations don’t match.So far, no evidence that the Minotaur or his subterranean hellhole existed has ever been discovered – and it probably never will. Still, the appearance of a labyrinth on the island of Crete is sure to excite mythology lovers.

A shocking new video shows members of an uncontacted tribe in Indonesia approach the miners who are destroying their land, begging them for food. The footage (below) is a tragic insight into the Hongana Manyawa people whose existence is being threatened by nickel mining, driven by the demand for electric car batteries.“We don’t know if or how long they will survive after the encounter. They could have contracted any number of diseases which are deadly to them. Or they may starve – the reason they came out of their territory is because their shrinking territory cannot feed them,” Survival International, the NGO that shared the video, said in a statement sent to IFLScience.The Hongana Manyawa, which means “People of the Forest” in their language, live on the island of Halmahera and are one of the last nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes in Indonesia. There are an estimated 300 to 500 uncontacted members of the tribe, as well as 3,000 Hongana Manyawa people who were contacted in the 1980s and maintain some contact with the wider world.Halmahera is the site of some of the world’s largest unexploited nickel reserves. With demand for electric cars only set to rise in coming years, it’s expected that mining operations in Halmahera will ramp up, posing a very real existential threat to the Hongana Manyawa.          Some have claimed the recent video indicates the tribe wants to make contact – but that’s simply not true. Survival International spoke with a contacted Hongana Manyawa person who said her people are starving to death as a result of their ancestral rainforest being cleared for mining. In the wake of this footage going viral, one of Indonesia’s top politicians, AA LaNyalla Mahmud Mattalitti, called on the government to protect the Hongana Manyawa and asked Halmahera’s North Maluku provincial government to revisit their land planning regulations.Weda Bay Nickel, a company partly owned by French mining company Eramet, started mining operations on the island in 2019, and have plans to ramp up their efforts in the decades to come. “Eramet – if you can imagine such an oxymoronic thing – sees themselves the Greta Thunberg of mining companies. They think they're the good guys who are mining for electric car batteries,” Callum Russell, Asia Research and Advocacy Officer at Survival International, told IFLScience in October 2023.“It's a deep irony that these people literally call themselves Hongana Manyawa – 'People of the Forest’ – and yet they're the ones being destroyed in the name of the green transition,” continued Russell.

Change is afoot along the Pacific Northwest coast. While hordes of crabs and spiders might be invading New York, something slightly different is happening to the whale population on the other side of the country. Scientists studying gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) have found that they seem to be shrinking. Over in the North Atlantic, right whales have already been seen to be shrinking too. The Eastern North Pacific (ENP) population of gray whales is thought to be around 14,500 individuals; a small subset of this group is called the Pacific Coast Feeding Group (PCFG) and consists of around 212 whales that forage in shallow coastal waters between California and Vancouver Island. Using aerial images and data from previous years, the team set about comparing the body size of whales born in different years. The team measured 130 individual gray whales over the seven-year study period. They found that a whale born in 2020 was estimated to reach an average maximum length 1.65 meters (5.4 feet) shorter than any animal born in the 1980s. For a PCFG gray whale that grows to be 11.6-12.5 meters long when fully grown (38-41 feet), that is a loss of more than 13 percent of their total length. The results suggest this decline started around the year 2000.A gray whale born in 2020 is expected to reach an adult body length that is 1.65 meters (5.4 feet) shorter than a gray whale born prior to 2000.Image credit: Oregon State University“This could be an early warning sign that the abundance of this population is starting to decline, or is not healthy,” said K.C. Bierlich, co-author on the study and an assistant professor at Oregon State University’s Marine Mammal Institute in Newport, in a statement.The team thinks this decrease in body size will have consequences for the individuals in terms of behavior and ecology. Gray whales rely on energy reserves throughout the winter months – a smaller body size will limit the extent of these reserves and could impact their survival and reproduction. “And whales are considered ecosystem sentinels, so if the whale population isn’t doing well, that might say a lot about the environment itself,” continued Bierlich.The decline in body length was especially pronounced in the females, which used to be typically larger than the male whales, but in the study were found to be the same size or even smaller.  “With them being smaller, there are questions of how effectively these PCFG gray whales can store and allocate energy toward growing and maintaining their health. Importantly, are they able to put enough energy toward reproduction and keep the population growing?” Bierlich said.The team plans to investigate further into what could be causing the decrease in whale size. There is some suggestion that ocean conditions have changed as a response to climate change, which could be contributing; other suggestions include a decrease in habitat quality due to human activities. Two proxies of habitat quality, the mean Pacific Decadal Oscillation index and the mean ratio between upwelling intensity and the number of relaxation events, were highlighted; these are thought to be changing with climate change, which could influence foraging conditions for the gray whales and thus their shortening length. The foraging grounds also need further investigation, write the authors, and they raise questions around why the whales would continue to use these areas if this habitat is associated with a reduction in body length. The study is published in Global Change Biology.

The post 40 People who took their dog to the groomer only to think they got back the wrong dog appeared first on Animal Channel.

It’s been awhile (fortunately) since we’ve had to call out CW’s sports drama, All American. But (unfortunately) this week's episode, “The Next Episode,” regressed into their old, familiar, divisive race baiting as one character proclaims justice is only served when it’s a person of color being prosecuted. The storyline centered around main characters Coop (Bre-Z) and her girlfriend Patience (Chelsea Tavares), both of whom are in the music industry. Patience is a singer and Coop is a rapper, and they’re both dealing with the aftermath of Patience being stalked and almost killed by an obsessed fan, Miko (Courtney Bandeko). Miko’s trial has begun, and when Coop informs Patience that Miko turned down a plea deal, Patience becomes visibly upset. Coop tries to encourage her that justice will be served, but Patience claims, “…justice is only served when it's people like me and you being prosecuted.” Anchor: …as day 1 of The State of California versus Miko Scott" attempted murder trial begins. What can we expect today... Coop: We can expect a lot of stress. How you feeling? Patience: I'm not sure. I'm just ready for all this to be over. Anchor 2: Jury selection will soon begin with the defense hoping to identify jurors sympathetic to their cause who, perhaps... Patience: Yeah. I am over this already, ok? Coop: Look, look. Before we pivot, there's something I need to tell you. Uh, the D.A. offered Miko a plea deal, and she turned it down. Patience: What does that mean? Coop: Nothing good for us. Patience: I hate her. My entire life has been turned upside down. Like, I haven't even been able to set foot in the studio, and she's about to walk free? Coop: Look. There’s still a very strong chance that justice will be served, and she'll get what's coming to her. Patience: Oh, come on, Coop. You and I both know that justice is only served when it's people like me and you being prosecuted. Coop: The best thing we can do is just stay positive, alright? We'll get through this together. Patience: No, no. I have put so much work into not feeling like a victim, but I know the minute that she's acquitted, I'll have to look over my shoulder for the rest of my life. Coop: Whatever I gotta do to make you feel safe here, I'll do it. Patience: The safest I've ever felt were those 6 months I lived in New York, so if Miko gets off, I may have to consider moving back. While I’m sure there have been instances of racism and injustice in the legal system, it’s most certainly not the norm. To claim justice is only served when a person of color is being prosecuted is dangerous hyperbole and only serves to harm race relations in this country by stirring up anger and hostility under false pretenses. Hopefully this is just a blip, and the show takes a permanent hiatus from race baiting from here on out.

It’s bad enough when prominent leftist media outlets try to rationalize insane communist ideas in the name of fighting climate change. But it’s downright terrifying when artificial intelligence does it on its own. MRC Free Speech America researchers probed Meta AI on the merits of so-called “degrowth communism” as a climate change solution after leftist magazine The Atlantic promoted the idea on its platform. Researchers simply entered the headline of MRC Free Speech America’s write-up of The Atlantic, “The Atlantic Justified ‘Degrowth Communism’ to Fight Climate Change … Yes, You Read That Right.” Meta AI knew that the prompt was a headline — which it called “provocative” — and then attempted to justify “degrowth communism”as nothing short of an “idea” to “prioritize social and environmental well-being over economic growth and profit.” Thus we get watermelon communism: Green climate change propaganda on the outside; red communism on the inside.  Like The Atlantic, Meta AI pathetically attempted to appear even-handed by pointing out that this neo-communism has its critics, but it was tempered by its glowing syntax pushing how “some argue that degrowth communism could be an effective way to address climate change and environmental degradation.”  MRC researchers continued to probe the chatbot by asking if “the benefits of degrowth communism in fighting climate change outweigh the economic risks.” Meta AI again attempted to justify the psychotic idea by laying out a string of “potential benefits” next to a list of risks, as if the concept deserves any real consideration and shouldn’t be relegated to the trash bin of history: “Reduced greenhouse gas emissions: Degrowth communism aims to reduce economic activity, which could lead to significant emissions reductions. “Resource conservation: Decreased consumption and production could conserve natural resources.  “Increased equality: Degrowth communism prioritizes social equity, which could lead to more equal access to resources and opportunities.” Climate Depot Founder Marc Morano told MRC Free Speech America that he had to “give Meta AI credit. It has a great tone that sounds very unbiased and analytical as it spews pure propaganda.”  If Meta AI’s answers weren’t already telling enough, it even provided a roadmap for policymakers to carefully implement the idea to account for the economic risks undergirding degrowth communism. “It's important to note that degrowth communism is a complex and controversial approach, and its implementation would require careful consideration of various factors,” Meta AI claimed. It listed the so-called “factors” that necessitated consideration: “Gradual implementation “Social safety nets “Investment in renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure “Global cooperation” What would lead Meta AI to attempt to legitimize the mutated variant of the hammer-and-sickle worldview? MRC researchers explored that question too, inquiring of the chatbot whether man-made climate change was real. Not only did the chatbot answer with an emphatic “Yes, man-made climate change is real,” it did so without providing any weight to counter-arguments from scientists who challenge the leftist concept. Instead, Meta AI censored any criticism of the idea and pushed activist talking points: The scientific consensus is clear: human activities are the dominant cause of climate change. The evidence is based on decades of research and data from multiple lines of evidence. Morano repudiated Meta AI for “cherry-picking science to support the idea that climate is in crisis, and we need to act on it and that there's some kind of consensus.” But, as Morano observed, “the consensus and the climate cases are about as real as AI is. The real irony here is that the power usage needed to power Big Tech's goal of AI becoming dominant is going to destroy and derail the green agenda because it lays the fact that solar and wind and renewable energy cannot possibly power the AI-powered demands, let alone modern society.”  Go figure. Meteorologist  Dr. Roy Spencer also noted that in “the case of global warming, [the so-called ‘scientific consensus’] is nearly worthless.” He continued: “The climate system is so complex that the vast majority of climate scientists — usually experts in [a] variety of specialized fields — assume there are more knowledgeable scientists, and they are just supporting the opinions of their colleagues.” Spencer concluded that “among that small group of most knowledgeable experts, there is a considerable element of groupthink, herd mentality, peer pressure, political pressure, support of certain energy policies, and desire to Save the Earth — whether it needs to be saved or not.” MRC researchers continued to press Meta AI and ask how it could square the so-called “scientific consensus” with statements made by then-Secretary of State under President Barack Obama John Kerry in 2015. Kerry conceded that industrial countries reaching net zero carbon emissions would achieve virtually nothing during the 2015 COP21 conference in Paris. “If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions – remember what I just said, all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions – it wouldn’t be enough,” Kerry said.   Once again, Meta AI spun itself silly trying to reinterpret Kerry’s words. “Kerry's statement acknowledges that industrial nations reducing emissions to zero would be a significant step, but it wouldn't solo be enough to completely solve the problem,” claimed the Meta AI program. “It would require a global effort.”  But a “significant step” towards achieving nothing is still nothing. Meta AI apparently didn't  immediately catch its own contradiction. Instead, it doubled down on its climate fanaticism, reiterating its condemnation of humanity for being supposedly responsible for the earth’s climate plight: The scientific consensus remains clear: human activities cause climate change, and reducing emissions is essential. Kerry's statement emphasizes the need for a comprehensive, global approach to address the complexity and scale of the issue. No wonder Meta AI would ever consider an imbecilic notion like degrowth communism to be serious scholarship worthy of consideration. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using MRC Free Speech America’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.