Indonesia’s current capital is in deep trouble. Drained of its vital groundwater reservoirs‚ Jakarta has become one of the fastest-sinking cities in the world. If left to nature‚ up to 25 percent of its land could be lost to the sea by 2050. The metropolis is also wracked with other common problems faced by emerging urban centers‚ such as heavy traffic‚ poor sanitation‚ dangerous air pollution‚ and shortages of drinking water.To relieve this logistical nightmare‚ Indonesia has drummed up a plan: relocate the capital from Jakarta to Nusantara in East Kalimantan – a city that doesn’t exist yet. This master plan involves the translocation of the capital’s administrative infrastructure‚ plus around 1.9 million people‚ from Indonesia’s main island Java to the sparsely populated island of Borneo.The idea of reshifting the capital was put into Indonesian law in 2022‚ when the proposed site of Nusantara was a jungle. Satellite images shared by NASA Earth Observatory show how the area was a vast green expanse of tropical rainforest in April 2022. By February 2024‚ however‚ images from the same vantage point show how the settlement is slowly starting to take form. The new satellite images reveal how soil has been exposed to make way for a network of roads and infrastructure development amidst the wild backdrop.Roads and hints of infrastructure emerge at Nusantara on February 19‚ 2024‚ in this satellite image by Landsat-9Image credit: USGS/NASAThe Nusantara website states that the first phase of the capital relocation project – set to conclude in 2024 – will see the country move its state palace and parliament building to the site this year. As per the plan‚ the President of Indonesia will celebrate the 79th anniversary of the country's independence at the site in August 2024. All being well‚ construction of the whole city will be done and dusted by 2045. Judging by the recent satellite imagery‚ there is still a very long way to go before Nusantara becomes the proud capital it dreams to be. Critics have started to hit out at the Indonesian government‚ arguing there’s a lack of transparency on the progress of the project. As ever‚ money is a problem. Many people are worried there’s a lack of funding behind the project and not enough foreign investors are being pulled by its promise. Likewise‚ some commentators have expressed doubt over whether there will be access to affordable housing in Nusantara. There are also big concerns about its environmental impact. The government claims Nusantara will be run on 100 percent renewable energy by 2045 while promoting it as a “smart‚ green‚ beautiful‚ and sustainable city”. However‚ many scientists believe it could increase deforestation in Borneo and increase Indonesia's carbon output. “Deforestation emissions from the new capital’s direct (30 kilometers [18.6 miles]) and indirect (200 kilometers [124.3 miles]) footprint could be approximately 50 MtCO2e [megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent] and 2326 MtCO2e‚ respectively‚ equivalent to 2.7–126 percent of Indonesia’s 2014 greenhouse gas emissions‚” said a 2020 paper on the topic of Nusantara. Borneo is a hive of biodiversity and home to numerous critically endangered species like the Bornean orangutan and Sumatran rhinoceros‚ as well as charismatic characters like the clouded leopard. Authorities insist that wildlife will be given the utmost protection‚ but environmentalists are still weary.In June 2023‚ Mongabay shared footage of an orangutan crossing the construction site of a planned toll road‚ clearly highlighting the potential disruption caused by dropping a new city into the middle of a jungle. “Fortunately‚ the new capital is sited on a coastal site more than 200 kilometers [124.3 miles] away from the Heart of Borneo ecoregion‚ which will spare Borneo the brunt of the immediate direct impacts. However‚ indirect spatial impacts can be very large‚ and along with environmental justice issues arising from further marginalization of disadvantaged groups‚ present a significant downside to the new capital’s development that must be preempted‚” the 2020 paper continues.

Standup comedian and actress Amy Schumer has shared that she has a rare hormonal condition known as Cushing’s syndrome. Schumer revealed her diagnosis in an interview with the News Not Noise newsletter and though she describes going through several tests and worries‚ the comedian explained‚ “I have the kind of Cushing that will just work itself out and I'm healthy [which] was the greatest news imaginable.”What is Cushing’s syndrome?Cushing’s syndrome is a rare condition that occurs when there’s too much cortisol in the body over a long period of time. You’ve probably heard of cortisol as the “stress hormone”; under normal circumstances‚ it’s produced by the adrenal glands sitting atop the kidneys and helps to regulate a whole host of different bodily functions‚ from blood pressure‚ to metabolism‚ to the stress response.The continuously high levels of cortisol leading to Cushing’s syndrome can have many different causes. Most commonly‚ it’s the result of extended use of steroid medications‚ which contain synthetic cortisol. However‚ on rare occasions it can be caused by a tumor in one of the adrenal glands‚ or on the pituitary gland in the brain – the latter is a particular type of the syndrome called Cushing’s disease. Though the tumors tend to be benign or non-cancerous‚ their presence is what causes the body to produce too much cortisol.How common is Cushing’s syndrome and who is more likely to be affected by it?One group of people at risk of Cushing’s syndrome are those taking steroid medicines‚ though it’s unclear how many of them will go on to develop the condition. However‚ Cushing’s syndrome that’s endogenous – caused by something inside the body – is rare‚ estimated to affect between 40 to 70 people out of every million each year.It’s more common in people aged between 30 to 50‚ though it can be found in children too. The condition is also more likely to affect people who are biologically female‚ with three times as many affected in this group compared to males.What are the symptoms of Cushing’s syndrome?How Cushing’s syndrome presents itself can vary from person to person‚ but there are some common symptoms. Visible signs might include: weight gain‚ particularly around the chest and tummy; a “hump” of fat between the shoulders or at the base of the neck; or a puffy‚ round face.People with the condition might also experience physical symptoms such as muscle weakness‚ thin skin‚ irregular periods‚ and fatigue. It can also have an impact on mood‚ with increased irritability‚ anxiety‚ or depression‚ as well as reduced libido.Left untreated‚ Cushing’s syndrome can lead to serious complications such as high blood pressure‚ type 2 diabetes‚ bone loss‚ and even heart attacks and stroke.Can Cushing’s syndrome be treated?If sufficiently treated‚ many people can recover from Cushing’s syndrome‚ with their cortisol levels returning to normal. How it is treated will depend on the cause‚ which healthcare professionals can determine through a series of tests‚ such as blood tests and imaging. For example‚ if the syndrome is caused by taking steroids‚ the dose can gradually be reduced to the minimum required in order to treat the condition it was prescribed for.When Cushing’s syndrome has been caused by the presence of a tumor‚ the most common approach to treatment is with surgery. After removal of a tumor in the pituitary gland‚ it can actually prevent the body from making enough cortisol‚ so patients are prescribed cortisol medication‚ which is usually taken for around six to 18 months. Where surgery doesn’t work‚ radiotherapy can also be an option.For tumors in the adrenal gland‚ the whole gland is usually surgically removed alongside the tumor. In some rare cases‚ tumors can be present on both glands‚ requiring both to be removed; when this is the case‚ it requires staying on lifelong medication in order to replace the missing cortisol and other hormones.All “explainer” articles are confirmed by fact checkers to be correct at time of publishing. Text‚ images‚ and links may be edited‚ removed‚ or added to at a later date to keep information current.  The content of this article is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice‚ diagnosis‚ or treatment. Always seek the advice of qualified health providers with questions you may have regarding medical conditions. 

Something magical appears to have been gifted to us out of the writers’ strike that gripped Hollywood for five months and delayed fall and winter show premieres - we are seeing much less liberal propaganda as these delayed shows finally roll out. Perhaps the writers have been too busy playing catch up to be working in cahoots with leftist groups such as Planned Parenthood‚ among others‚ and inserting liberal lectures as they normally do. In the case of Amazon Prime’s hit drama Expats‚ there was actually a very pro-life moment in the season finale that definitely wouldn’t have aired if Planned Parenthood’s television advisors had any say in it. Based on the 2016 novel The Expatriates by Janice Y. K. Lee‚ Expats takes place in Hong Kong and stars heavy hitters Nicole Kidman as Margaret Woo‚ Sarayu Blue as Margaret’s best friend Hilary Starr and Ji-young Yoo as Mercy - three women dealing with the fallout of Margaret’s missing little boy Gus (Connor James) who was taken from a crowded market one fateful evening under Mercy’s watch. After Mercy has an affair with Hilary’s alcoholic husband David (Jack Huston) in the midst of her grief‚ she finds herself pregnant. She’s unsure at first whether she wants to choose life for her baby and is wracked with guilt that she’s carrying a child after losing Margaret’s. Not wanting to face her pregnancy‚ Mercy puts off making any decisions or going to a doctor until David gives her a check to see a reputable ob/gyn in episode 6‚ “Home.” Mercy finally makes an appointment and finds herself in awe when she comes face to face with her baby on the sonogram screen: Dr. Leung: Mercy Kim. Twenty-five. Can you tell me the date of your last period? It's blank on the form. Mercy: Um... It's not something I usually keep track of. I'm more like moon to moon. Dr. Leung: I see. Well‚ I guess the baby will have to tell us. Nurse: Please lie back. Dr. Leung: We're going to open your robe. Mercy: Maybe you should buy me dinner first. Okay. Dr. Leung: Great. Relax. Have you been taking good care of yourself? Folic acid? Prenatals? Mercy: Does the OJ in a screwdriver count? Dr. Leung: No. We take some measurements to see how many weeks you're at. Oh‚ you're quite far along. Have you not seen a doctor? Mercy: It's been on my to-do list. Dr. Leung: Well‚ you must start taking supplements. Here's your baby. Mercy: That's my baby? Dr. Leung: I'd say you're about 23 weeks along. Mercy: I can't feel it‚ but it's totally moving. That's so weird. Dr. Leung: Everything looks normal. Luckily‚ you're young. I faced a crisis pregnancy myself when I was a teenager. I’ll never forget the first time I saw my baby on a sonogram. There really aren’t any words to describe the emotions that came over me and the shock I felt seeing this little person growing inside of me. I had never considered an abortion‚ but that moment is one reason I strongly feel women should be given a sonogram before choosing abortion. How tragic it must be for women who never got to see their child moving or see the baby's heart beating strongly‚ only to find out after it’s too late‚ such as in a future pregnancy when they see a sonogram for the first time. Isn’t it more pro-woman and pro-choice to have a woman be fully informed before making such a life and death decision? Hopefully one day‚ the atrocity of abortion won’t be permitted at all. But until that time‚ give women the full truth. Thankfully‚ Mercy chooses life for her baby and makes peace with both Margaret and Hilary by the end of the episode. Aside from Margaret’s disdain for Christianity‚ the show was free of any leftist tropes and therefore was intriguing and entertaining to watch‚ as Hollywood productions should be. Let’s hope it’s a long time before leftist political propaganda fully returns to entertainment. With a presidential election nearing however‚ we won’t get our hopes up too high.

It is difficult to read former Newsweek reporter David Graham's "Trump the  Survivor" which was published in The Atlantic magazine on Sunday without conjuring up images of Wile E. Coyote in perpetual pursuit of the Road Runner‚ who always manages to evade doom. In fact‚ the subtitle of Graham's story just reinforces the image of Trump as the Road Runner: "He always manages to find a way." You can almost feel Graham's Coyote level of frustration as his Road Runner Trump "always manages to find a way" over and over and over again to escape carefully planned doom. BEEP! BEEP! ...no consumer of the mainstream press can miss that he is a liar and a racist‚ nor that courts have found him to have committed fraud and sexual abuse. Outlets large and small have done impressive work ferreting out his history of sexual harassment‚ financial chicanery‚ and poor decision-making. At some moments‚ it seemed like not a word could be spoken in the Oval Office without The New York Times or The Washington Post producing a scathing report within days. Nor can any reader or viewer have missed the fear and dislike of Trump that much of the press evinces. Nevertheless‚ Trump persists. He’s also used the negative coverage to deprecate the media and lower its impact among his supporters. BEEP! BEEP! January 6 also resulted in Trump’s banishment from Twitter and Facebook. This was hailed in bien-pensant circles as well past due—an appropriate penalty for spreading misinformation and inciting violence‚ and one that would help shuffle Trump out of relevance. As with the journalism critiques‚ this sentiment may have been morally right‚ but the expectation that it would hurt Trump was unfounded. In fact‚ the bans may have helped him politically‚ becoming a rallying point for his supporters‚ who called them censorship. Moreover‚ his disappearance from mainstream platforms (and retreat to his own Truth Social) has made it easier to miss or tune out his eruptions‚ even as his rhetoric has become ever more authoritarian. (This effect also casts doubt on the idea that with less press coverage‚ Trump would fade.) BEEP! BEEP! With all of these Trump-stoppers having failed‚ some people have attached their hopes to the courts to stop Trump. Trump is facing legal challenges on many fronts. He owes nearly $500 million total from civil judgment for defamation‚ sexual abuse‚ and fraud in New York State. A trial on falsifying business records in Manhattan is expected to begin next month. He has been indicted on felony charges in federal court and in Georgia connected to his election-subversion efforts‚ and on separate federal felony charges over alleged hoarding of classified documents. Once again‚ these proceedings have been morally and legally appropriate‚ establishing that no one is beyond the reach of the law‚ even if he is a star. But the barrage of indictments has done nothing to hurt Trump politically. ...in a turn that is astonishing but somewhat predictable‚ the cases against Trump have actually improved his political position‚ at least with Republican voters. He saw his poll numbers rise after his first felony indictment‚ in Manhattan. BEEP! BEEP! A common thread that unites each of these failed tricks to sink Trump is how existing American institutions—the Republican Party‚ the press‚ congressional oversight‚ and the justice system—are ill-equipped to handle an authoritarian demagogue of Trump’s variety. That leaves the ballot as maybe the only thing that could stop Trump. Notice how the Left always thinks "existing institutions are ill-equipped" when they don't accomplish the Left's objectives. They can't imagine that overwhelmingly nasty media bias and weaponizing the justice system create a backlash. Trump must be an "authoritarian" when he aggressively fights back and denounces "fake news" and fake justice.  Wow! What a novel idea! Maybe the ultimate arbiter for choosing our leaders should be the (gasp!) ballot box.

MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider laid bare the hypocrisy of Big Tech companies censoring conservatives while relying on expansive liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.  Schneider laid out the historical and legal case for free speech on these platforms during the Feb. 20 edition of The Wayne Dupree Show. When co-host and American Tribune Co-Founder Jason Robertson asked Schneider how to restructure Section 230 “so that it doesn’t come back to bite us in the a** five years from now‚” Schneider pointed out that the case for free speech had a precedent dating back “hundreds of years.” Schneider explained that “common carriers” must provide service to everyone and thus are not liable for the actions of people using them.  “These Big Tech companies…want it both ways; They want to be able to provide a service and make lots of money‚ but also discriminate‚” Schneider continued‚ hammering social media companies’ hypocrisy. “You can’t provide service to the broad public and then discriminate against a few of us. You got to open it up to everybody.” The MRC Free Speech Vice President explained the history of the issue. “A common carrier is a company that provides a service to the public that is available to all — just like Facebook and Google‚ they’re common carriers. And the rule has always been — except for one exception — the rule has always been that common carriers cannot deny service to anybody‚ and then as a consequence‚ they’re not held liable when somebody does something wrong using that service.” Schneider added that “common carriers” had been held to this standard in every case‚ save for Plessy vs. Ferguson‚ a railroad racial discrimination case that was eventually overturned. “These Big Tech platforms want to resurrect the Plessy vs. Ferguson case and say‚ ‘No‚ we should be allowed‚ even though we’re common carriers. We should be allowed to discriminate against people and deny service to some people‚ just because we wanna‚’” Schneider explained before adding‚ “Let’s not go back to the Plessy vs. Ferguson era where big corporations are allowed to discriminate. Let’s allow individuals to have access to these big providers of services‚ like over the internet. We just need to go back to what has always been recognized under the law.” This conversation comes at an important moment. Two separate cases litigating this “common carrier” argument were scheduled for a Feb. 26 Supreme Court hearing‚ NetChoice‚ LLC v.  Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice‚ LLC. In both cases‚ NetChoice seeks to shield big tech companies’ censorship efforts from regulation in the face of state laws protecting consumers from discrimination by “common carriers.”  Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

The CEO of one of the most prominent leftist artificial intelligence companies in the U.S. and another company with deep ties to the Communist Chinese government were revealed to be prominent shareholders of the censorship-obsessed tech giant Reddit.   Chinese censorship company Tencent and OpenAI’s Sam Altman were listed as two of the top three shareholders in tech company Reddit‚ behind only Condé Nast’s owner Advance Publications‚ according to The Verge. The outlet cited Reddit’s IPO filing‚ revealing that Altman had more shares than Reddit CEO Steve Huffman. Reddit’s documented obsession with crushing free speech makes more sense in light of the new findings.  “While he isn’t a co-founder‚ Altman has been deeply involved in Reddit since basically the beginning‚” The Verge noted. “He quietly stepped off the board in 2022 as OpenAI was rising to prominence and Reddit was gearing up to go public. Now‚ he owns a big chunk of a company that really wants AI companies to pay for its data. Interesting times!” That’s putting it mildly. Because Altman owns 8.7 percent of Reddit’s stock‚ versus Huffman’s 3.3 percent‚ the CEO of ChatGPT maker OpenAI has more than twice Huffman’s voting power‚ The Verge explained. An August 2023 study found clear leftist/Democrat bias in ChatGPT. MRC Free Speech America recently uncovered how ChatGPT promoted leftist news ratings firms Ad Fontes and NewsGuard as a way to determine the quality of news organizations in the U.S. Both of those companies have documented histories of propping up leftist media while denigrating right-leaning media‚ as MRC research has emphasized. Does Altman influence Reddit to display similar bias? Meanwhile‚ Tencent’s stake could trigger even more questions about Reddit’s position toward free speech. MRC Free Speech America reported in 2019 that Tencent was involved in doing the Chinese government’s censorship dirty work‚ and had invested at least $150 million in Reddit—even though Tencent got Reddit banned in China. Then‚ last year‚ Markets Insider reported that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was buying shares in tech companies‚ including Tencent. The apparent goal was to give the CCP “special rights over certain business decisions‚” Insider explained. The anti-free speech CCP can even control the content tech companies provide‚ with rights over some company decisions‚ the outlet added. But CCP influence on Tencent goes back even further. Taiwan News covered a report in 2020 that 23 percent of Tencent employees were CCP members. Among Tencent’s companies are social media WeChat and gaming studio Riot Games. It seems Reddit is one of the multiple American companies in which Tencent has invested‚ raising questions of the extent of Chinese government involvement. For instance‚ the CCP also owns a stake in TikTok’s parent company ByteDance‚ and TikTok has censored content to please the CCP‚ while its data is reportedly accessible to ByteDance. Could key Reddit data or information also be accessible to Tencent and thus the CCP? And does Tencent import its censorship activities to American companies like Reddit? Reddit has censored thousands of pieces of content in the past for “hate”‚ including a 2022 LGBTQ-inspired effort to censor the word “groomer‚” an ominous sign.  Conservatives are under attack: Contact the Reddit admin and demand that the platform mirror the First Amendment: Tech giants should afford their users nothing less than the free speech and free exercise of religion embodied in the First Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

PBS NewsHour co-anchor Amna Nawaz worried out loud that Biden was leaning toward "very harsh" immigration policies -- Trump-like policies -- and that will hurt with "core groups" that got him elected in 2020. But New York Times columnist David Brooks gently disagreed‚ that Biden doesn't want a "bright line" on the border‚ since Trump is beating him by 39 points on immigration right now.  This was the Nawaz question/lament:  NAWAZ: We heard Laura Barron-Lopez's reporting there on some weakening among the Biden coalition and core groups there. And we know‚ David‚ that President Biden is now weighing some very harsh immigration tactics through executive action at the U.S. Southern border‚ reminiscent really of some Trump-era policies. So does it make it harder for the president‚ as a candidate‚ to draw a bright line between himself and his likely general election opponent‚ former President Trump‚ when he's coming out with some of the same policies? Nawaz had to be disappointed when Brooks broke out of that bubble‚ where advocates of an open border (or something like it) are uspet with Biden. Brooks gave this a polling reality check:  BROOKS: : Yes‚ on this issue‚ Joe Biden does not want to draw a bright line. The country is with Donald Trump. If you ask who do you approve on different issues‚ on general competency‚ Trump is up by like 12 points. On who can handle the economy better‚ Trump is up by 25. On immigration‚ he's up by 39 points. And so this is an issue where you want to fudge that line. And just on the merits‚ I'm as pro-immigration as I think it's possible to be‚ but our asylum system is meant for people seeking asylum‚ escaping repression. And a lot of the people coming across the border are coming across the border for a lot of the reasons my ancestors came across. They wanted economic opportunity. But that's not asylum. And so the system is somewhat broken down‚ and Biden is right to do something. And‚ politically‚ I do think his survival depends on it. Nawaz turned to Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart to support her worry: "Do these kinds of moves‚ Jonathan‚ further alienate members of that Biden coalition that helped get him to the White House in the first place?" So sad! Capehart agreed with Brooks on the politics:  CAPEHART: Yes‚ it does further alienate. But‚ I mean‚ I have to agree with David on this‚ that immigration is an issue that the president has to fudge this line. But what I also think he has going for him is‚ he gets to say‚ the Republicans made me do this. "There was a bipartisan Senate immigration bill that never got a vote. I was in on the negotiations. They never gave us a vote. And so we have to do something." And the election of Tom Suozzi in — on Long Island‚ gosh‚ was that a week-and-a-half ago now‚ almost two weeks ago‚ was a signal of how salient the immigration issue is. So we could consider it refreshing that the PBS pundits are less in thrall to the Left than the PBS co-anchor‚ if only because both want Biden to eke out a win. But it shows you how the NewsHour is now in control of anchors who would make it the WokeHour. 

Click to Skip Ahead Overview Why Bully Sticks Can Be Dangerous for Dogs My Dog Has Eaten a Bully Stick‚ What Do I Do Now? Signs Treatment Prevention You’re likely reading this because your dog has swallowed a bully stick and you need to know what to do next. A bully stick is a dog chew usually made from the penis of a bull. They are long thin chewy stick treats for dogs. They are designed to be chewed over a long period‚ but due to the fact they are so palatable‚ some dogs get over-excited and swallow them whole or swallow large sections of the chew. Whether your dog has swallowed a whole chew or just a larger piece of one‚ the main risk is choking and gastrointestinal tract blockages or perforation. If you are concerned that your dog may have ingested a large piece of a bully stick‚ or swallowed it whole‚ you need to contact your vet immediately. You may not have seen them eat the whole thing but have noticed that the stick got eaten in a much shorter time. You may know that they had a chew earlier in the day and now they are showing signs of choking or a blockage. Whatever the situation is‚ you need to contact your vet immediately. It is always better to be safe than sorry. What Are Bully Sticks? Image Credit: Dmitriev Mikhail‚ Shutterstock A bully stick is a long thin chewy product usually made from a dehydrated bull penis. It is a popular choice for a chew for a few reasons: It only contains one ingredient It is high in protein It is low in fat It supposedly helps with the maintenance of healthy teeth It keeps dogs occupied and can prevent them from chewing things they shouldn’t The size of the sticks varies‚ and bully sticks are suitable for dogs of any breed and size. They are a relatively hard chew treat‚ so usually dogs will gnaw at them and break small pieces off over a long period of time. Why Bully Sticks Can Be Dangerous for Dogs Larger dogs‚ dogs with very strong jaws‚ and avid chewers‚ may be able to bite off larger sections or swallow whole chews. The chews are not particularly sharp‚ however‚ if they have had parts bitten off this may leave pointy bits that could cause internal damage. Some bits that are swallowed may be pushed through the lining of the gastrointestinal tract and perforate the guts. This is a medical emergency‚ and your dog will require immediate veterinary assistance. If left untreated‚ your dog may develop septic peritonitis which is a serious condition that can result in death. The chew may not even make it past the throat as it may become lodged in this area as the dog tries to swallow. Sometimes it can be difficult to locate if it is further back and out of view. The bully sticks are designed to be swallowed by your dog. If they eat small parts over a long period of time‚ this should not cause a problem unless they ate a large amount of the chews. For example‚ if they stole a whole packet and ate them all in one sitting. There is nothing poisonous or toxic in the chews. The issue is the shape of the whole chew or a larger section of one which can potentially be a choking hazard‚ cause a blockage in the intestines‚ or even perforate them. Some dogs will manage to eat a whole bully stick and have no symptoms at all. The body will start to digest the stick as soon as the dog starts chewing it‚ so even if a really large piece is ingested‚ the body may still be capable of digesting it properly before it causes any issues. Image Credit: Dmitriev Mikhail‚ Shutterstock My Dog Has Eaten a Bully Stick‚ What Do I Do Now? Follow these simple steps if your dog has eaten a bully stick. 1. Remove any of the remaining bully stick out of their reach and ensure they don’t have access to any more. Stay with your dog to monitor them for any immediate signs of choking or distress. 2. Contact your vet straight away. Make sure you stay with your dog or have another adult supervise them and ring your vet immediately. Your vet will need to ask some questions to obtain a full clinical history and decide on what action needs to be taken next. Questions may include: Did your dog eat the whole bully stick or parts of it? Have they eaten this type of treat before? How long ago did the incident occur? What size is your dog? What breed is your dog? How much does your dog weigh? Does your dog have any current health issues? Is your dog showing any signs of distress‚ discomfort‚ or illness currently? 3. Do everything your vet tells you. Follow your vet’s instructions as your vet is likely to tell you to bring your dog down to be seen. 4. Don’t attempt to fix your dog at home. If you think your dog may have something stuck in their throat‚ trying to retrieve it yourself is dangerous. That is unless it is very obvious‚ and you have easy access to it without further injuring your dog or getting injured yourself. You may end up pushing it further down into the stomach or doing damage to surrounding tissues trying to pull out. Not to mention if your dog is in pain or stressed‚ they may bite you. Attempting to make your dog vomit at home is advised against too. If there are sharp or pointy sections of the stick‚ this could potentially cause damage on the way back out or cause it to become lodged somewhere. 5. Don’t let your dog out of your sight. It is very important to monitor your dog for any signs of choking‚ abdominal pain‚ or general distress. It is also important to monitor them to ensure they don’t run off or try to escape as this would prevent or delay them receiving the treatment they need. Image Credit: Iryna Imago‚ Shutterstock Clinical Signs Your Dog Has Eaten a Bully Stick It is important to remember that some dogs will be absolutely fine after eating a bully stick as mentioned above. They will be able to digest the stick and break it down before it causes any medical issues. If there is a problem‚ some of the clinical signs may include: Coughing/retching: If there is a part of the chew lodged in your dog’s throat that they can’t remove themselves‚ they may cough and retch repeatedly Reduced appetite: Your dog may not feel like eating if they have pain associated with their gastrointestinal tract or if they have a temperature due to infection. Lethargy: Your dog may be reluctant to move around and be less interactive if they are feeling unwell. Vomiting: Your dog may vomit if they are choking or they may vomit if there is an obstruction or infection. They may also vomit if they are in pain. Adopt the praying position: Your dog may stand with the front half of their body down on the floor and their back half in the air‚ this is usually a sign of abdominal discomfort or pain. Constipation or diarrhea: Depending on whether there is inflammation‚ irritation‚ or a blockage‚ this can affect the consistency and movement of the feces in the bowels. Changes in temperament: Your dog may suddenly snap at you if they are in pain or frightened. Image Credit: Dmitriev Mikhail‚ Shutterstock How to Treat a Dog That Has Eaten a Bully Stick Depending on the size of your dog and the size of the stick‚ the first option may be to monitor the dog. This is because the stick is made of protein that the body is capable of digesting‚ so often the dog will be able to break it down despite it being whole or in a large piece. If it appears as if the stick is causing problems‚ your vet will make a treatment plan. Your vet may decide to use a piece of equipment called an endoscope. This is a small camera on a probe that is inserted down the throat to allow the vet to visualize the inside of the gastrointestinal tract. It may be used to locate the stick‚ and then another probe with a grabbing tool connected can be inserted to retrieve the stick safely. Your vet may have to perform surgery to remove the stick from your dog if it is further down the gastrointestinal tract or if there has been any damage such as perforation. How to Prevent Your Dog from Eating a Bully Stick If you are worried about your dog eating a whole bully stick‚ there are a few things you can do to prevent any harm from coming to them. Break up the stick into smaller pieces that the dog can chew on‚ but that are smaller and more manageable if swallowed whole. Change treats—there are plenty of other chewable treats on the market for dogs currently that are different shapes so potentially would be safer. Supervise your dog if you want to give them bully sticks Ensure they always have access to fresh water when chewing the sticks. Conclusion Bully sticks are a popular chew treat for dogs. They are extremely palatable to dogs and often when given one‚ dogs will become very excited and try to eat the chew whole or swallow large pieces without chewing properly. Due to their shape and size‚ bully sticks have the potential to cause problems including choking‚ gastrointestinal blockage‚ or perforation. Care must be taken when giving these treats to your dog. Sources MSD Vet Manual Pub Med NCBI NLM NIH Pub Med NCBI NLM NIH MSD Vet Manual Featured Image Credit: Dmitriev Mikhail‚ Shutterstock The post My Dog Swallowed a Bully Stick: Should I Be Worried? Our Vet Explains appeared first on Pet Keen.

Click to Skip Ahead What Is Declawing? What Is Laser Declawing? Why Do Owners Want to Declaw Their Cats? Why We Advise Against Laser Declawing Comparison With Other Declawing Methods Lots of owners are curious about using laser declawing methods to remove their cat’s claws. Are you one of these owners and would you like to know why it is advised against? Read on to hear the low down on laser declawing from a professional. What Is Declawing? Declawing (officially known as onychectomy) is a procedure where the end of the digit on a cat’s paw is removed. It can be carried out by amputation of a section of the digit‚ or by removing the whole of the last toe bone. Usually‚ the declawing methods described involve amputation of the end of the toe from the first joint after the nail bed. This is called disarticulation. The reason behind this surgery can be for medical reasons such as the presence of chronic infection or a tumor. Shockingly‚ a common reason is because the owner has requested it to be done as they dislike their cat scratching things. Image Credit: RJ22‚ Shutterstock What Is Laser Declawing? Laser declawing is a permanent way of removing cats’ claws and ensuring they don’t grow back. Laser declawing involves the use of a medical-grade CO2 laser to cut the digit at the first joint up from the nail bed. Alternative methods of declawing involve using a sharp scalpel blade to intersect the toe at the first joint‚ or bone cutters or nail trimmers to cut through the toe at the joint. With this last method‚ proper dislocation often does not occur‚ and bone fragments can be left behind which can be incredibly painful for the cat. An alternative surgical option is an operation called a Deep Digital Flexor Tendonectomy. The tendons of the deep digital flexor are cut‚ and this prevents the cat from retracting its claws back into the nail sheath. Here‚ the cat’s nails remain intact‚ however‚ the cat is unable to scratch anything. This means that the cat’s nails will grow rapidly without any of the usual wear and tear they would experience if the cat was allowed to scratch. Therefore‚ the cat’s nails all need trimming regularly to prevent them from growing into the pads. This is also a controversial surgery with ethical issues. Why Do Owners Want to Declaw Their Cats? Cats scratch with their claws and scratching is part of their normal day-to-day behavior. They scratch to defend themselves and to mark their territory. When they scratch‚ they deposit important chemical messengers called pheromones. Pheromones give other cats vital bits of information. Cats use pheromones as a mark of their territory to ensure they feel safe and secure. Some cats scratch their owners or other animals and break the skin or cause considerable damage. Domesticated cats often find objects or furniture around the house to scratch as they cannot do what they would usually do in the outside world. Owners are often frustrated if cats start to scratch carpets or sofas and leave marks or rip them. Some owners request that the claws be removed from their cats to prevent them from scratching things in the house or themselves or other animals. Some people argue that if cats are going to scratch humans and destroy furniture‚ declawing is a good idea as they believe it will reduce the number of cats that are rehomed or euthanized. Image Credit: RJ22‚ Shutterstock Why We Advise Against Laser Declawing Declawing‚ regardless of the method used‚ is the equivalent of cutting the tip of the finger off at the level of the first knuckle. When put like this‚ it is understandable that most vets think it is barbaric and a form of mutilation. International Cat Care states that they consider “declawing to be an act of mutilation and unethical for anything other than genuine therapeutic medical reasons.” Declawing cats involves the amputation of part of their digit‚ it is a major operation that often causes behavioral changes‚ altered gait‚ and long-term pain. All surgical procedures come with potential risks‚ however‚ it is difficult to justify the risks if the surgery is solely for the convenience of the owner. Laser declawing comes with its own unique set of risks too: There is a risk of infection after the operation. The laser can burn the end of the bone‚ and this leads to inflammation and pain. Bone fragments can be left behind which can cause lameness‚ chronic pain‚ and gait abnormalities. Cats have to relearn how to walk as their balance is affected. If the cat alters its gait when walking‚ this in turn affects the other limbs and the back. Other reasons against laser declawing include: Cats that have had their claws removed still experience the urge to scratch. They are left with an instinct that they can’t act upon which is extremely cruel. If the cat’s claws are removed‚ they are unable to defend themselves if they have any unwanted encounters with other cats or predators; they have one less weapon in their arsenal and are more likely to become injured. Cats use their claws to climb up and down tall things such as trees and fences. If their claws have been removed‚ they are unable to do this safely and are more vulnerable to injuries. It has been suggested that if cats are experiencing chronic discomfort and pain after they have been declawed‚ this can lead to unwanted behavioral changes such as inappropriate elimination and unprovoked aggression. In many countries‚ declawing cats is already banned or heavily frowned upon for anything other than a medical reason decided by a vet. Image Credit: Evgenia Terekhova‚Shutterstock Is Laser Declawing Better Than Other Declawing Methods? Some owners think that laser declawing is a more humane way of removing the claws. They believe that there is potentially less trauma using lasers as the nerve endings get sealed off which means it is less painful and there is usually less blood loss. There are some studies stating that cats that had been declawed using the laser method experienced less pain initially (in the first 48 hours after the procedure)‚ however‚ all methods of declawing were proven to be painful. Less pain in one scenario compared to another extremely painful scenario does not justify the first scenario. These studies also stated that pain levels were the same regardless of the method of declawing used 6 days post-operation. The findings from these studies may help vets if they have a case that requires a digit amputation for a medical reason‚ it does not justify the declawing procedure for the owner’s convenience. Conclusion Laser declawing is a painful procedure that has short and long-term effects on the cat’s quality of life. If there is a medical reason for the removal of the claw‚ the risks of surgery vs. the benefits of the removal should be discussed with your vet. Cats suffer without their claws as they use them in many different ways in their day-to-day life. It is very difficult to justify the removal of claws just so that it is more convenient for owners of cats‚ therefore we strongly advise against it. Sources KJVR NCBI NLM NIH Pub Med NCBI NLM NIH Pub Med NCBI NLM NIH Featured Image Credit: Africa Studio‚ Shutterstock The post Laser Declawing Your Cat: Our Vet Explains Why We Advise Against It appeared first on Pet Keen.

In his 2010 book "Jesus: A Biography from a Believer‚" the Catholic historian Paul Johnson comments on Christ's famous dictum that “greater love hath no man than this‚ that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13): But by friends he meant all without exception. There was nothing exclusive about Jesus and his teaching. His message was the most inclusive of all such communications. No one before had‚ and no one since has‚ so confidently and warmly and indeed naturally opened his arms to the entire human race. Only the Son of God could love the entire human race‚ but it's always been up to mere men to bring them together; the story of Christianity is largely the story of Christians adapting whatever means are at their disposal to spread the good news. While "He Gets Us" is not the first effort to harness the reach of mass media in communicating Jesus' message‚ it is certainly one of the most ambitious. Launched in 2022 with a budget of $100 million‚ the campaign evangelizes using all the sophisticated techniques of the modern agency. "We can treat each other with respect and dignity‚ which actually doesn't mean that we have to give up our beliefs and convictions. Jesus never deviated from his mission." After a ten-market test campaign at the end of 2021‚ "He Gets Us" went national with spots during the 2022 NCAA March Madness tournament; that summer‚ baseball fans encountered "He Gets Us" signage in stadiums across the country. Live sporting events are a crucial focus for the campaign‚ "He Gets Us" consultant and spokesman Jason Vanderground tells Align. "We're just looking at the media of today and saying‚ how can we get that message out in the places where people pay attention?" The campaign's most prominent media spend has been on the Super Bowl telecast. After making a splash with its first Super Bowl ad in 2023‚ "He Gets Us" returned to last month's game with its latest spot‚ which depicts foot washing as a symbolic gesture of humility bridging political and ideological divides. Julia Fullerton-Batten Reaction to the ad highlighted some of those divides. While the images themselves have nothing to say about sexuality‚ progressives compensated for the lack of offense by noting Come Near‚ the non-profit behind the ads‚ has links to "far-right" organizations advancing an "anti-LGBT" agenda. Even more vocal backlash came from conservatives‚ who accused the spot of presenting an overly feel-good version of Jesus. As BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey wrote on X‚ "If you've got the money and opportunity to buy a Super Bowl ad slot‚ share the gospel. Don't waste it on some ambiguous mumbo jumbo that makes Jesus into our image rather than depicting Him as the King and Savior He is." For Vanderground‚ who considers himself a "Jesus follower‚" such criticism from his fellow Christians misunderstands the purpose of the campaign. It's aimed not so much at them‚ but at "spiritually open skeptics." How to get them interested in Christianity? According to Vanderground‚ extensive preliminary research suggested the most effective course would be to lead with the person of Jesus‚ rather than doctrine or history: "[They] look at Christianity and they see they see a lot of hypocrisy. ... But when you talk with them about Jesus ... far and away‚ Jesus is the one who Americans connect with. And they say‚ there is somebody who was unconditionally loving‚ was kind‚ was forgiving‚ was gracious‚ was welcoming‚ was loving to all." These qualities are especially appealing‚ Vanderground continues‚ given the country's current atmosphere. "We need [these qualities] right now because of the anxiety‚ the loneliness‚ all of the toxicity‚ the tension. Jesus appears to them as a very good model for how to navigate [this] type of environment." Of course‚ to follow Jesus also includes heeding his call to repent‚ a call critics have pointed out is notably absent from the campaign. What's important to "He Gets Us‚" however‚ is that we all get the chance. "Jesus invited everybody‚" Vanderground says. "And many times‚ there was no prerequisite to spending time with Him‚ hearing from Him‚ interacting with Him. He didn't say you had to do anything first before you could have that." While it's fair to assume no Christian would dispute that‚ the politically charged pairings in the photos (a pro-life protester and a woman seeking an abortion‚ a suburban white mom and an immigrant‚ a priest and a gay roller-blader) have led some conservatives to see the foot washing as yet another performative capitulation to wokeness. Vanderground disagrees‚ noting that the apostles whose feet Jesus washed were hardly moral exemplars. Judas would soon betray him‚ Peter would deny him‚ and Matthew's background as a tax collector was particularly loathsome. "We can treat each other with respect and dignity‚ which actually doesn't mean that we have to give up our beliefs and convictions. Jesus never deviated from his mission." As for the campaign's mission‚ the controversy doesn't seem to have hindered it. In the days immediately following the Super Bowl‚ 1.2 million people visited the "He Gets Us" website‚ many of them lingering for longer than average durations. In that same time‚ 16‚000 people subscribed to the free‚ seven-week Bible-reading plans "He Gets Us" has shared via the popular YouVersion platform. And more than 6‚000 people signed up for smaller online discussion groups. Julia Fullerton-Batten "He Gets Us" plans to debut the next phase of the campaign this spring‚ while continuing to track audience reaction to what Vanderground likens to polite‚ friendly "sidewalk conversations." The church‚ it's often said‚ is a hospital for sinners. In other words‚ every one of us. But nobody accepts the healing it offers without first admitting that they're sick. For Vanderground and the "He Gets Us" team‚ the best guide for persuading people to consider this first step is Jesus himself‚ with his radical willingness to meet people where they are. To illustrate this‚ he refers to one of his favorite images from the ad: a daughter washing the feet of her alcoholic mother. "I think so many of us are like‚ I've been there. I've had a parent or a loved one who was hitting rock bottom and just needed help. And the best chance for that [to happen] is unconditional love‚ which does a very special thing on the inside of a person."