Far-left Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano was torched online Thursday after she asked her followers to donate their hard-earned money to her son’s youth baseball team. Times are either tough for the “Charmed” actress or she is simply too cheap to send the team to games this coming season with new...

A little girl called dumb on the playground burst into tears. But things took a beautiful turn when another student noticed her distress and gave her the sweetest pep talk. We could all learn a lot from this little boy! By now‚ I think we’ve all come to realize that the saying‚ “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me” isn’t true. Words have power. They can wound us deeply. RELATED: 2nd Grader Sees Boy With Autism Crying On 1st Day Of School And His Compassion Is Going Viral However‚ words also have the power to uplift and encourage. And a viral TikTok video shows how‚ after one child used his words as a weapon‚ another little boy stepped up to use his in an incredible way! Little Girl Starts Crying After Being Called Dumb The incident appears to take place on a playground. One little girl is crying because another child called her “dumb.” From the video‚ it appears as though an adult has already stepped in to console the little girl. But it’s the actions of a fellow classmate that makes this moment so powerful. Seeing the girl’s distress‚ a young boy comes over to offer encouragement. And he wisely points out that we shouldn’t let others define our self-worth. “Don’t listen to that guy that called you dumb. Listen to yourself‚” he tells her. RELATED: Screams Heard from School Bus Day After Day As Kids Cheer on the ‘Fastest Kid Alive' But this thoughtful young man doesn’t stop there. He’s got more great advice to share. “Just stop talking to people that call you dumb‚” the boy says. And then he affirms the girl by saying‚ “Look‚ you’re smart.” The boy’s words have such a big impact. The little girl originally began crying because of a hurtful insult. But after this little boy’s uplifting pep talk‚ she reaches out to hug him and you can hear the emotion in her voice is no longer from sadness. “You’re such a nice friend‚” she exclaims as she hugs him tight. After that‚ the young man invites her to come and play and the little girl happily agrees. It’s such a touching moment and an incredible example for all of us! Isn’t it amazing just how much we can learn from children?! When it feels like the world is against us‚ sometimes all we need is one person to believe in us. Seeing this little boy speak life is so inspiring. He’s a great example of the type of friend we all need in our lives‚ but also of the kind of friend we need to be to others. YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Little Girl Talks To Herself While Skiing And Dad's Microphone Records Her Adorable Commentary Be sure to share this story with others to help restore faith in humanity! “Let no corrupt speech proceed out of your mouth‚ but such as is good for building up as the need may be‚ that it may give grace to those who hear.” Ephesians 4:29 WATCH: Little Boy’s Kind Words For A Girl Called ‘Dumb’ Go Viral @goodnewscorrespondent Faith in humanity restored HIM: Don’t listen to that person who calls you dumb. Listen to yourself.”HER: “You’re such a nice friend.” @unklearnold T ♬ Jacob’s Prayer – Emile Mosseri LISTEN: Principal Adopts ‘Troublemaker’ Student | She Was Trapped Sailing the World h/t: TikTok/goodnewscorrespondent The post Little Girl Was in Tears After Kid Called Her ‘Dumb’ but Boy’s Uplifting Words for Her Go Viral appeared first on GodUpdates.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a rule that removes the requirement to obtain informed consent for medical research. “This final rule allows an exception from the requirement to obtain informed consent when a clinical investigation poses no more than minimal risk to the human subject‚” the rule reads. The rule went into effect on January 22‚ 2024. Just so you know the FDA and HHS made it so that “informed consent” could be waived by IRB’s. The new rule went into effect two days ago. pic.twitter.com/2z8DMNVMeT — Champagne Joshi (@JoshWalkos) January 25‚ 2024 A closer look: From the Federal Register: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA‚ the Agency‚ or we) is issuing a final rule to amend its regulations to implement a provision of the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act). This final rule allows an exception from the requirement to obtain informed consent when a clinical investigation poses no more than minimal risk to the human subject and includes appropriate safeguards to protect the rights‚ safety‚ and welfare of human subjects. The final rule permits an institutional review board (IRB) to waive or alter certain informed consent elements or to waive the requirement to obtain informed consent‚ under limited conditions‚ for certain FDA-regulated minimal risk clinical investigations. The FDA received critical comments opposing the rule‚ stating that “waiving consent conflicts with existing ethical and international standards‚ such as the Belmont Report‚ the Nuremberg Code‚ the Declaration of Helsinki‚ and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).” The agency ‘disagreed’ with the comments opposing the rule‚ saying “there are some situations in which important research cannot practicably be conducted if informed consent is required.” https://t.co/T8rydrVhmhYou should really take the time to read the convoluted reasoning they employ in response to the critical comments submitted. Basically they say that in certain situations informed consent could fuck up our plans so we have to be able waive it. pic.twitter.com/LHianY1W7D — Champagne Joshi (@JoshWalkos) January 25‚ 2024 Interestingly that was one of the negative comments they received and they address international law by simply disagreeing and moving on. It’s in the comments section via that link. — Champagne Joshi (@JoshWalkos) January 25‚ 2024 Cont. from the Federal Register: (Comment 2) Of the comments that oppose the proposed rule‚ two oppose it because they assert that waiving consent conflicts with existing ethical and international standards‚ such as the Belmont Report‚ the Nuremberg Code‚ the Declaration of Helsinki‚ and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Two other comments suggest that FDA withdraw the proposal because the underlying law and revised Common Rule are defective and “against the spirit” of human subject protection. (Response 2) FDA disagrees with the comments opposing the rule. We believe that the rule upholds the principles underlying existing ethical standards‚ while accounting for advances in the conduct of FDA-regulated clinical investigations. It is also consistent with the obligations of the ICCPR and the U.S.’ reservations‚ declarations‚ and understandings to the Covenant (see‚ e.g.‚ Ref. 1). The standards referenced in the comments emphasize the importance of voluntary informed consent for research participants. As stated in the proposed rule‚ obtaining informed consent from those who volunteer to participate in research is a fundamentally important principle of human subject protection. However‚ there are some situations in which important research cannot practicably be conducted if informed consent is required. This rule permits a waiver of consent in limited circumstances‚ consistent with the statutory amendments Congress made in section 3024 of the Cures Act. The waiver is only permitted in circumstances where the risks posed to subjects by the research are minimal and where an IRB has reviewed the research and determined‚ among other things‚ that the waiver or alteration will not adversely affect the rights and welfare of subjects. If research can be practicably carried out without a waiver of informed consent‚ investigators cannot obtain a waiver under this rule. Additionally‚ the ethical principles identified in many of the national and international guidelines for research conduct‚ such as the three ethical principles described in the Belmont Report (respect for persons‚ beneficence‚ and justice)‚ should be considered and weighed within the context of a particular clinical investigation‚ as the consideration of each principle depends on multiple factors associated with the investigation‚ such as research methodologies or participant populations. This rule permits a waiver or alteration of consent only in limited circumstances where the risks posed to subjects by the research are very low. We believe that with the protections in place under this rule (including the requirement for an IRB to find and document that the waiver or alteration will not adversely affect the rights and welfare of subjects)‚ the balance between respect for persons and beneficence should come out in favor of facilitating research that satisfies the criteria in § 50.22 by permitting waiver or alteration of informed consent requirements to advance the public health. Additionally‚ although informed consent is a critical element of FDA’s regulations that reflects the principle of respect for persons through the exercise of autonomy‚ we believe that the criteria provided in this rule also reflect the principle of respect for persons. For example‚ in a minimal risk clinical investigation for which an IRB waives consent‚ ensuring that the rights and welfare of subjects are not adversely affected by the waiver demonstrates respect for persons‚ as does providing additional pertinent information about the investigation to subjects whenever appropriate (Ref. 2). Finally‚ FDA declines to withdraw the proposed rule in response to the comments that disagree with section 3024 of the Cures Act and the revised Common Rule. The Common Rule’s provisions for waiver or alteration of informed consent for minimal risk research have been in effect for over 30 years and have provided appropriate safeguards to protect the rights and welfare of human subjects. As noted above‚ FDA believes that this rule provides an important mechanism for conducting clinical investigations that will both appropriately safeguard human subjects and potentially lead to medical advances that serve the public health. “Will this waiver of informed consent for ‘minimal risk’ clinical trials allow hospitals &; other medical facilities to enroll patients in clinical trials without their knowledge?” one X user questioned. Will this waiver of informed consent for “minimal risk” clinical trials allow hospitals &; other medical facilities to enroll patients in clinical trials without their knowledge?https://t.co/jEUp9CBUwV https://t.co/KCFywL73Nq pic.twitter.com/Mv1uOCmj5n — Tessa (@DrTessaT) January 25‚ 2024 “In an effort to encourage the discovery of more treatment and diagnostic options in the medical field‚ the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a rule allowing certain clinical trials to operate without obtaining informed consent from participants. The hitch?… pic.twitter.com/dePtqgNySt — Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) January 24‚ 2024 Chief Nerd writes: “In an effort to encourage the discovery of more treatment and diagnostic options in the medical field‚ the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a rule allowing certain clinical trials to operate without obtaining informed consent from participants. The hitch? The study cannot pose more than minimal risk to humans and must include appropriate safeguards to protect the rights‚ safety‚ and welfare of those involved. The rule was issued in late December 2023 and went into effect on Jan. 22‚ 2024. ‘This could include studies comparing the effectiveness of approved products to determine which option works best for certain patients.’” The Epoch Times reports: The FDA initially proposed the rule in November 2018‚ permitting an institutional review board to waive the requirement for informed consent under certain conditions. The agency received fewer than 50 comment letters on the proposed rule from academia‚ institutional review boards (IRBs)‚ public advocacy groups‚ industry‚ trade organizations‚ public health organizations‚ and citizens. Most of the comments favored the agency’s efforts‚ supporting the rule because it reduced administrative burdens on both IRBs and researchers while encouraging valuable research on important health issues affecting the public without putting trial participants at risk‚ according to the FDA. Not all comments were supportive‚ with some warning that “a waiver of consent may be necessary and ethically justifiable for certain types of clinical investigations that are critical for medical advancement‚ patient care‚ and safety.” Two commenters believed the rule simply goes “against the spirit” of protecting humans in medicine. However‚ many researchers noted in their support that certain minimal-risk trials are nearly impossible to conduct if consent is required. One example includes the analysis of a retrospective records review; before the new rule‚ such a study required informed consent from the patients whose data were being studied. By being able to dig into such information‚ these researchers and the FDA argue they may be able to make medical advancements without sacrificing patient safety or rights.

The state of Alabama conducted the first-ever execution by nitrogen gas. “It marked the first time that a new execution method has been used in the United States since lethal injection‚ now the most commonly used method‚ was introduced in 1982‚” the Associated Press reports. #BREAKING: Alabama is set to conduct its first execution by nitrogen gas within the hour‚ following the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of the final appeal. pic.twitter.com/lAV6m1fADl — R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) January 26‚ 2024 Officials performed the execution on Kenneth Eugene Smith‚ 58‚ who was convicted in a 1988 murder-for-hire killing of a preacher’s wife. The execution took place in the death house at the William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. The introduction of the new execution method has put the death penalty back in the limelight. Alabama execution using nitrogen gas‚ the first ever‚ again puts US at front of death penalty debate https://t.co/LxtaUaVUKN — The Associated Press (@AP) January 26‚ 2024 From the Associated Press: The execution took about 22 minutes from the time between the opening and closing of the curtains to the viewing room. Smith appeared to remain conscious for several minutes. For at least two minutes‚ he appeared to shake and writhe on the gurney‚ sometimes pulling against the restraints. That was followed by several minutes of heavy breathing‚ until breathing was no longer perceptible. In a final statement‚ Smith said‚ “Tonight Alabama causes humanity to take a step backwards. … I’m leaving with love‚ peace and light.” He made the “I love you sign” with his hands toward family members who were witnesses. “Thank you for supporting me. Love‚ love all of you‚” Smith said. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey said the execution was justice for the murder-for-hire killing of 45-year-old Elizabeth Sennett in 1988. “After more than 30 years and attempt after attempt to game the system‚ Mr. Smith has answered for his horrendous crimes‚” Ivey said in a statement. “I pray that Elizabeth Sennett’s family can receive closure after all these years dealing with that great loss.” Mike Sennett‚ the victim’s son‚ said Thursday night that Smith “had been incarcerated almost twice as long as I knew my mom.” CBS Mornings aired this video report: A convicted killer in Alabama was executed Thursday night using nitrogen gas — a method that had never been used in an execution in the U.S. or tested. Some of the witnesses say his death was inhumane. https://t.co/sRGCNb67gp pic.twitter.com/4Jk9Uvb2Wt — CBS Mornings (@CBSMornings) January 26‚ 2024 Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said Alabama is ready to help other states use the same method of execution. WATCH: An Alabama man was executed yesterday — becoming the first person in the U.S. to be executed via nitrogen gas. Alabama AG Steve Marshall called the execution "textbook‚" and said that Alabama is ready to help other states follow in using this method.https://t.co/ZtqExHzidV pic.twitter.com/7hkRhfQ4wm — ABC News (@ABC) January 26‚ 2024 Per ABC News: The United States Supreme Court denied Smith’s last-ditch appeal on Thursday‚ asking for a stay of the execution‚ which was set for 7 p.m. ET. He and his attorneys had argued that execution by nitrogen gas would constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th Amendment and that he “is suffering mentally and physically from the posttraumatic stress” of the botched execution attempt‚ documents show. Smith was one of three people in Alabama whose executions were botched in 2022‚ according to the Death Penalty Information Center‚ a non-profit that provides data and analysis on capital punishment. The Supreme Court rejected a previous appeal Wednesday evening‚ allowing Alabama officials to proceed with the execution. Alabama is one of three states‚ including Mississippi and Oklahoma‚ that allows nitrogen gas to be used as a method of execution‚ but it has never been carried out before.

The Republican National Committee is backtracking on a resolution that would have declared Donald Trump the presumptive nominee.