Canada-based financial institution TD Bank Group (TD) has...

Emirates NBD and...

US-based fintech Felix Pago has announced a partnership...

Mastercard has entered into a partnership with Tap Payments to launch a Click to Pay with Payment Passkey service for optimised ecommerce transactions. 

SEB Embedded has selected Thought Machine’s cloud-native core banking system, Vault Core, as the foundation for its latest service offering.

Metro Bank has been fined nearly GBP 17 million by the UK’s financial watchdog FCA for failings in its money-laundering controls over four years.

The National Bank of Cambodia (NBC) has announced the launch of the Bakong Tourists App with Mastercard, with the institution aiming to optimise digital payments for tourists visiting Cambodia. 

Singapore-based TransferTo has partnered with the Pan-African Ecobank Group in order to expand financial access and cross-border payments across the region of Africa.

Mbank has partnered with Al Etihad Payments Company (AEP), a Central Bank of the UAE (CBUAE) subsidiary, to introduce the Aani Instant Payment Platform on its mobile application.

The graphics in my post about R^2 were produced by an updated version of a sixty-year old program involving the U.S. census. Originally, the program was based on census data from 1900 to 1960 and sought to predict the population in 1970. The software back then was written in Fortran, the predominate technical programming language a half century ago. I have updated the MATLAB version of the program so that it now uses census data from 1900 to 2020.... read more >>

Floating point arithmetic doesn't get the respect it deserves. Many people consider it mysterious, fuzzy, unpredictable. These misgivings often occur in discussion of vector sums. Our provocatively named SuperSum is intended to calm these fears.... read more >>

I didn't know anything about these topics until a couple of weeks ago. Now I can't stop thinking about them.... read more >>

Source: Bryce Adams 11/04/2024

O3 Mining Inc. (TSXV:OIII; OTCQX:OIIIF) updated the timeline for its flagship Marban Alliance gold project in Quebec and closed a small equity financing, reported CIBC analyst Bryce Adams in an Oct. 30 research note.

"With the updated shareholder register and continued derisking of Marban, we expect that the takeout potential for O3 shares increases within the next two years," Adams wrote.

O3 Mining is the third iteration of the successful Osisko Mining Inc. (OSK:TSX) model, focused on acquiring, exploring and developing mineral properties in Canada.

168% Return Implied

The Canadian company was trading at the time of the report at about CA$1.12 per share, and CIBC's target price on it is CA$3 per share, noted Adams. These figures reflect a potential return for investors of 168%.

O3 Mining has an Outperformer rating.

PEA Coming this Quarter

Adams presented O3's timeline for Marban Alliance and noted it aligns with CIBC's projections. The next step is completion of a preliminary economic assessment (PEA), slated for Q4/24, "which we expect will be reported on a standalone basis, with upside from potential toll milling agreements," the analyst wrote. G Mining Services now is the lead consultant on the PEA.

Next, a feasibility study will be done based on the PEA and the 2022 prefeasibility study. Targeted dates are Q1/25 to start it and Q2/25 to finish it.

Also in Q1/25, baseline environmental studies are slated for completion. Impact studies are to be started in Q2/25, and filing is slated for Q1/26.

More Strategic Investments

O3 Mining completed a non-brokered private placement of CA$1.4 million with Sidex LP and NQ Investissement Minier, two mining investment funds sponsored by the Quebec government, reported Adams. Subsequently, O3 closed a follow-up offering of US$76,800 to the company's strategic investor at the same terms.

"We view these as smaller issuances, and after model updates, our net asset value per share estimate is now one penny lower at CA$4.48 per share," Adams wrote.

O3 Mining will use the proceeds to drill at Kinebik, where it continues to consolidate land. This project shares the same formation as Hecla Mining Co.'s (HL:NYSE) Casa Berardi mine and Gold Fields Ltd.'s (GFI:NYSE; GFI:JSE) Windfall project.

Takeout Target Potential

Through its acquisition of Osisko, Gold Fields gained 100% ownership of Windfall (it previously had acquired 50% from Osisko in 2023) and 17% of O3 Mining, Adams pointed out. Gold Fields also unsuccessfully made a bid for Yamana Gold Inc.'s (YRI:TSX; AUY:NYSE; YAU:LSE) interests in the Canadian Malartic mine in Quebec earlier in 2023 and "has indicated further growth interest in Quebec."

"With Measured and Indicated resources of 2,400,000 ounces (2.4 Moz) and Inferred resources of 0.6 Moz at its flagship Marban project and near-term final permitting submission, O3 has above average takeout potential," purported Adams.

Sign up for our FREE newsletter at: www.streetwisereports.com/get-news

Important Disclosures:

1. O3 Miing Inc. is a billboard sponsor of Streetwise Reports and pays SWR a monthly sponsorship fee between US$4,000 and US$5,000.
2. Doresa Banning wrote this article for Streetwise Reports LLC and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an independent contractor.
3. This article does not constitute investment advice and is not a solicitation for any investment. Streetwise Reports does not render general or specific investment advice and the information on Streetwise Reports should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her personal financial adviser and perform their own comprehensive investment research. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports' terms of use and full legal disclaimer. Streetwise Reports does not endorse or recommend the business, products, services or securities of any company.

For additional disclosures, please click here.

Disclosures for CIBC Equity Research, O3 Mining Inc., October 30, 2024

Analyst Certification: Each CIBC World Markets Inc. research analyst named on the front page of this research report, or at the beginning of any subsection hereof, hereby certifies that (i) the recommendations and opinions expressed herein accurately reflect such research analyst's personal views about the company and securities that are the subject of this report and all other companies and securities mentioned in this report that are covered by such research analyst and (ii) no part of the research analyst's compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed by such research analyst in this report.

Potential Conflicts of Interest: Equity research analysts employed by CIBC World Markets Inc. are compensated from revenues generated by various CIBC World Markets Inc. businesses, including the CIBC World Markets Investment Banking Department. Research analysts do not receive compensation based upon revenues from specific investment banking transactions. CIBC World Markets Inc. generally prohibits any research analyst and any member of his or her household from executing trades in the securities of a company that such research analyst covers. Additionally, CIBC World Markets Inc. generally prohibits any research analyst from serving as an officer, director or advisory board member of a company that such analyst covers. In addition to 1% ownership positions in covered companies that are required to be specifically disclosed in this report, CIBC World Markets Inc. may have a long position of less than 1% or a short position or deal as principal in the securities discussed herein, related securities or in options, futures or other derivative instruments based thereon. Recipients of this report are advised that any or all of the foregoing arrangements, as well as more specific disclosures set forth below, may at times give rise to potential conflicts of interest. CIBC World Markets Inc. does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. As a result, investors should be aware that CIBC World Markets Inc. may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. Analysts employed outside the U.S. are not registered as research analysts with FINRA. These analysts may not be associated persons of CIBC World Markets Corp. and therefore may not be subject to FINRA Rule 2241 restrictions on communications with a subject company, public appearances and trading securities held by a research analyst account.

CIBC World Markets Inc. Price Chart For price and performance charts, please visit CIBC on the web at https://researchcentral.cibccm.com/#/disclaimer-centralnew or write to CIBC World Markets Inc., 161 Bay Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON M5H 2S8, Attn: Research Disclosure Chart Request.

Important Disclosure Footnotes for O3 Mining Inc. (OIII.V) • 2a These companies are clients for which a CIBC World Markets company has performed investment banking services in the past 12 months: O3 Mining Inc. • 2c CIBC World Markets Inc. has managed or co-managed a public offering of securities for these companies in the past 12 months: O3 Mining Inc. • 2e CIBC World Markets Inc. has received compensation for investment banking services from these companies in the past 12 months: O3 Mining Inc. • 2g CIBC World Markets Inc. expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from these companies in the next 3 months: O3 Mining Inc. • 3a These companies are clients for which a CIBC World Markets company has performed non-investment banking, securities-related services in the past 12 months: O3 Mining Inc. For important disclosure footnotes for companies mentioned in this report that are covered by CIBC World Markets Inc., click here: CIBC Disclaimers & Disclosures

Legal Disclaimer This report is issued by CIBC Capital Markets. CIBC Capital Markets is a trademark brand name under which Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (“CIBC”), its subsidiaries and affiliates (including, without limitation, CIBC World Markets Inc., CIBC World Markets Corp. and CIBC Capital Markets (Europe) S.A.) provide different products and services to our customers around the world. Products and/or services offered by CIBC include corporate lending services, foreign exchange, money market instruments, structured notes, interest rate products and OTC derivatives. CIBC’s Foreign Exchange Disclosure Statement relating to guidelines contained in the FX Global Code can be found at https://cibccm.com/en/disclosures/fx-disclosure-statement/. Other products and services, such as exchange-traded equity and equity options, fixed income securities and futures execution of Canadian securities, are offered through directly or indirectly held subsidiaries of CIBC as indicated below. CIBC World Markets Inc. is a member of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund and the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization. In the United States, CIBC World Markets Corp. is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and the Securities Investor Protection Fund. In Luxembourg. CIBC Capital Markets (Europe) S.A. (RCS Luxembourg: B236326) is authorised by the European Central Bank (the “ECB”) and supervised by the Luxembourg Financial Supervisory Authority (Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier) under the oversight of the ECB. CIBC Australia Ltd (AFSL No: 240603) is regulated by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (“ASIC”). CIBC World Markets (Japan) Inc. is a member of the Japanese Securities Dealer Association. CIBC (TSX/NYSE: CM) is a bank chartered under the Bank Act (Canada) having its registered office in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and regulated by the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. CIBC New York Branch is licensed and supervised by the New York State Department of Financial Services. In the United Kingdom, CIBC London Branch is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and subject to regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and limited regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Sydney Branch (ABN: 33 608 235 847) is an authorised foreign bank branch regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA). Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Hong Kong Branch is a registered institution under the Securities and Futures Ordinance, Cap 571, and a limited liability foreign company registered with the Hong Kong Companies Registry. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Singapore Branch is a wholesale bank licensed and regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. This report is issued and approved for distribution by (a) in Canada, CIBC World Markets Inc., a member of the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (“CIRO”), the Toronto Stock Exchange, the TSX Venture Exchange and a Member of the Canadian Investor Protection Fund and (b) in the United States either by (i) CIBC World Markets Inc. for distribution only to U.S. Major Institutional Investors (“MII”) (as such term is defined in SEC Rule 15a-6) or (ii) CIBC World Markets Corp., a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). U.S. MIIs receiving this report from CIBC World Markets Inc. (the Canadian broker-dealer) are required to effect transactions (other than negotiating their terms) in securities discussed in the report through CIBC World Markets Corp. (the U.S. broker-dealer). CIBC World Markets Corp. accepts responsibility for the content of this research report.

Distribution to Institutional Customers Only Canada This report is provided, for informational purposes only, to institutional investor and retail clients of CIBC World Markets Inc. in Canada, and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities discussed herein in any jurisdiction where such offer or solicitation would be prohibited.

Legal Disclaimer (Continued) United States This report is provided, for informational purposes only, to Major US Institutional Investor clients of CIBC World Markets Corp. in the United States, and does not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities discussed herein in any jurisdiction where such offer or solicitation would be prohibited. United Kingdom The distribution of this report in the United Kingdom is being made only to, or directed only at, persons falling within one or more of the exemptions from the financial promotion regime in section 21 of the UK Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (as amended) (“FSMA”) including, without limitation, to the following: • authorised firms under FSMA and certain other investment professionals falling within article 19 of the FSMA (Financial Promotion) Order 2005 (“FPO”) and directors, officers and employees acting for such entities in relation to investment; • high value entities falling within article 49 FPO and directors, officers and employees acting for such entities in relation to investment; and • persons who receive this presentation outside the United Kingdom. The distribution of this report to any other person in the United Kingdom is unauthorised and may contravene FSMA. No person falling outside such categories should treat this report as constituting a promotion to them or rely or act on it for any purposes whatsoever. This report is distributed solely to eligible counterparties or professional clients and not retail clients as defined in point (8) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 2017/565 as it forms part of UK domestic law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. All other jurisdictions This report is distributed solely to institutional clients and not retail clients as defined by the applicable securities legislation and regulation to which CIBC Capital Markets may be subject in any jurisdiction, and only in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. The securities mentioned in this report may not be suitable for all types of investors. This report does not take into account the investment objectives, financial situation or specific needs of any particular client of CIBC World Markets. Recipients should consider this report as only a single factor in making an investment decision and should not rely solely on investment recommendations contained herein, if any, as a substitution for the exercise of independent judgment of the merits and risks of investments. The analyst writing the report is not a person or company with actual, implied or apparent authority to act on behalf of any issuer mentioned in the report. Before making an investment decision with respect to any security recommended in this report, the recipient should consider whether such recommendation is appropriate given the recipient's particular investment needs, objectives and financial circumstances. CIBC World Markets suggests that, prior to acting on any of the recommendations herein, Canadian retail clients of CIBC World Markets contact one of our client advisers in your jurisdiction to discuss your particular circumstances. Non-client recipients of this report who are not institutional investor clients of CIBC World Markets should consult with an independent financial advisor prior to making any investment decision based on this report or for any necessary explanation of its contents. CIBC World Markets will not treat non-client recipients as its clients solely by virtue of their receiving this report

Legal Disclaimer (Continued) Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, and no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made regarding future performance of any security mentioned in this report. The price of the securities mentioned in this report and the income they produce may fluctuate and/or be adversely affected by exchange rates, and investors may realize losses on investments in such securities, including the loss of investment principal. CIBC World Markets accepts no liability for any loss arising from the use of information contained in this report, except to the extent that liability may arise under specific statutes or regulations applicable to CIBC World Markets. Information, opinions and statistical data contained in this report were obtained or derived from sources believed to be reliable, but CIBC World Markets does not represent that any such information, opinion or statistical data is accurate or complete (with the exception of information contained in the Important Disclosures section of this report provided by CIBC World Markets or individual research analysts), and they should not be relied upon as such. All estimates, opinions and recommendations expressed herein constitute judgments as of the date of this report and are subject to change without notice. Nothing in this report constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice. Since the levels and bases of taxation can change, any reference in this report to the impact of taxation should not be construed as offering tax advice on the tax consequences of investments. As with any investment having potential tax implications, clients should consult with their own independent tax adviser. This report may provide addresses of, or contain hyperlinks to, Internet web sites. CIBC World Markets has not reviewed the linked Internet web site of any third party and takes no responsibility for the contents thereof. Each such address or hyperlink is provided solely for the recipient's convenience and information, and the content of linked third party web sites is not in any way incorporated into this document. Recipients who choose to access such third-party web sites or follow such hyperlinks do so at their own risk. Although each company issuing this report is a wholly owned subsidiary of CIBC, each is solely responsible for its contractual obligations and commitments, and any securities products offered or recommended to or purchased or sold in any client accounts (i) will not be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation or other similar deposit insurance, (ii) will not be deposits or other obligations of CIBC, (iii) will not be endorsed or guaranteed by CIBC, and (iv) will be subject to investment risks, including possible loss of the principal invested. CIBC Capital Markets and the CIBC Logo Design are trademarks of CIBC, used under license. © 2024 CIBC World Markets Inc., CIBC World Markets Corp. and CIBC Capital Markets (Europe) S.A. All rights reserved. Unauthorised use, distribution, duplication or disclosure without the prior written permission of CIBC World Markets is prohibited by law and may result in prosecution.

( Companies Mentioned: TSXV:OIII;OTCQX:OIIIF, )

Source: Streetwise Reports 11/06/2024

Independence Gold Corp. (IGO:TSX.V; IEGCF:OTCMKTS) has begun a comprehensive diamond drill program at its fully-owned 3Ts Project, located in British Columbia. Positioned 16 km from Artemis Gold Inc.'s Blackwater Project, the 3Ts Project covers 8,840 hectares within a prolific epithermal quartz-carbonate vein district on the Nechako Plateau. The program will consist of approximately 25 drill holes, totaling a minimum of 7,500 meters. The targets are the Ted-Mint and Tommy Vein Systems, with a primary emphasis on unexplored depth zones to identify high-grade intercepts for mineral resource expansion.

The 3Ts Project encompasses multiple identified veins, with strike lengths from 50 to over 1,100 meters and true widths of up to 25 meters. Additional exploration will be directed at the Ian, Johnny, and Larry Veins, focusing on mineralization both along strike and at depth. The Ootsa and Balrog targets, identified through geophysical and geological data collected during the summer 2024 exploration program, are also set to undergo further investigation.

President and CEO Randy Turner stated in the press release, "We look forward to building on the success of recent drill programs at 3Ts. With a larger and more extensive drill program planned, including deeper holes to test the major vein systems below the microdiorite sill and further testing of the newly discovered Ootsa and Balrog targets, we anticipate a very busy and exciting year ahead."

Upon hearing this news, Jeff Clark of The Gold Advisor wrote, "And they're off! This is the THIRD drill program this year at 3Ts, an aggressive schedule that, as investors, we're very happy to see."

He noted that these results will help expand the current resource. He continued, "Remember, management just raised a whopping US$6.65 million, more than double the initial goal, due to strong investor interest. They thus have the financial firepower to conduct all this drilling before winter sets in. The stock isn't reacting to the news, but this isn't something that would normally have a big impact on it. It's cooled from its recent spike so offers a very attractive entry point if you don't have the shares you want. This is an overweight position for me, and it's my belief we'll see more spikes just like the one we witnessed. More news and potential catalysts ahead. This is definitely one to own for the gold bull market."

Looking Into Gold

On October 29, Kitco reported that gold prices approached US$2,800. This reflects a substantial 35% increase for the year. According to the report, this growth resulted from multiple factors, including geopolitical conflicts, Federal Reserve interest rate normalization, strong central bank demand, and political uncertainties surrounding the upcoming presidential election. Analysts described these elements as a "perfect storm," which significantly bolstered investor sentiment and reinforced gold's appeal as a hedge against economic instability.

"This is definitely one to own for the gold bull market," Jeff Clark of The Gold Advisor Wrote.

LiveMint, on October 30, noted the strong performance of precious metals, emphasizing that silver had outpaced gold over the past year. Ankit Gohel from LiveMint mentioned, "Gold has delivered a substantial return of over 33.5% since Dhanteras last year," but highlighted that silver had achieved an even more impressive rally of over 40.5%. Despite this, gold continued to attract attention, with Chintan Mehta, CEO of Abans Holdings, emphasizing gold's role as a safe haven during times of uncertainty. He said, "Gold stands out in times of uncertainty . . . It's a complete safe-haven unlike silver, which always has that industrial component attached to it, adding an extra layer of risk."

In a November 4 article, Egon von Greyerz of Matterhorn Asset Management provided a historical perspective on gold's consistent role in preserving wealth. Von Greyerz discussed how gold had risen 78 times since 1971, when the dollar lost its gold backing, emphasizing that "gold held in the investor's name in safe vaults and jurisdictions outside the financial system is the ultimate form of wealth preservation." He argued that gold's ascent had only just begun, driven by the devaluation of fiat currencies and ongoing global debt expansion.

Independence Catalysts

According to the company's September 2024 investor presentation, the 3Ts Project remains a high-priority asset with substantial growth potential. The updated NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate for the Tommy, Ted, and Mint veins, totaling 522,330 ounces of gold and 13.83 million ounces of silver, is expected to expand with new discoveries and continued drilling. Recent metallurgical testing has returned gold recoveries of up to 97.9%, and the strategic location near Artemis Gold's Blackwater Mine adds further credibility to the project's prospects. [OWNERSHIP_CHART-7643]

The fall 2024 drill program, with a budget of CA$4.5 million, will test high-grade zones and underexplored targets, building on over 63,000 meters of historical drilling. Additionally, new targets such as the Balrog and Ootsa anomalies present significant exploration upside, underscoring the project's potential for resource expansion and discovery.

Ownership and Share Structure

According to Refinitiv, about 4.38% of the company is held by insiders and management.

7.97% is with strategic investor Newmont Corp.

The rest is retail.

Its market cap is CA$29.28 million with 167.8 million shares outstanding. It trades in a 52-week range of CA$0.34 and CA$0.12.

Sign up for our FREE newsletter at: www.streetwisereports.com/get-news

Important Disclosures:

1) James Guttman wrote this article for Streetwise Reports LLC and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an employee.

2) This article does not constitute investment advice and is not a solicitation for any investment. Streetwise Reports does not render general or specific investment advice and the information on Streetwise Reports should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her personal financial adviser and perform their own comprehensive investment research. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports' terms of use and full legal disclaimer. Streetwise Reports does not endorse or recommend the business, products, services or securities of any company.

For additional disclosures, please click here.

( Companies Mentioned: IGO:TSX.V;IEGCF:OTCMKTS, )

Gay and bisexual men in England, Scotland, and Wales can now donate blood, plasma and platelets under certain circumstances without having to wait three months, the National Health Service announced this week.; Credit: Wilfredo Lee/AP

Gay and bisexual men in England, Scotland, and Wales can now donate blood, plasma and platelets under certain circumstances, the National Health Service announced this week in a momentous shift in policy for most of the U.K.

Beginning Monday, gay men in sexually active, monogamous relationships for at least three months can donate for the first time. The move reverses a policy that limited donor eligibility on perceived risks of contracting HIV/AIDs and other sexually transmitted infections.

The new rules come as the U.K. and other countries around the world report urgent, pandemic-induced blood supply issues.

Donor eligibility will now be based on each person's individual circumstances surrounding health, travel and sexual behaviors regardless of gender, according to the NHS. Potential donors will no longer be asked if they are a man who has had sex with another man, but they will be asked about recent sexual activity.

Anyone who has had the same sexual partner for the last three months can donate, the NHS said.

"Patient safety is at the heart of everything we do. This change is about switching around how we assess the risk of exposure to a sexual infection, so it is more tailored to the individual," said Ella Poppitt, Chief Nurse for blood donation at NHS Blood and Transplant, in a statement. "We screen all donations for evidence of significant infections, which goes hand-in-hand with donor selection to maintain the safety of blood sent to hospitals."

People who engage in anal sex with a new partner or multiple people or who have recently used PrEP or PEP (medication used to prevent HIV infection) will have to wait three months to donate - regardless of their gender.

Why did the U.K. make this change?

The NHS moved to alter its blood donation eligibility rules following a review by the FAIR (For the Assessment of Individualised Risk) steering group. The panel determined an individualized, gender-neutral approach to determining who can donate blood, platelets, and plasma is fairer and still maintains the safety of the U.K.'s blood supply.

The findings were accepted in full by the government last December.

Researchers will continue to monitor the impact of the donor selection changes for the next 12 months to determine if more changes are needed, NHS said.

What is the policy in the U.S.?

Despite efforts by advocates to change regulations in the U.S, the ability for gay and bisexual men to donate blood is still restricted.

A ban on gay and bisexual blood donors has been in effect since the early 1980s when fears about HIV/AIDS were widespread.

The Food and Drug Administration's current policy states a man who has sex with another man in the previous three months can't donate. Federal rules previously made such donors wait 12 months before giving blood, but due to low blood supplies during the pandemic the federal government changed the policy in April.

The Red Cross said they are participating in a pilot study funded by the FDA using behavior-based health history questionnaires, similar to those used in the U.K.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A teen gets a dose of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine at Holtz Children's Hospital in Miami on May 18. Nearly 7 million U.S. teens and pre-teens (ages 12 through 17) have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, so far, the CDC says.; Credit: Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images

It's been a little more than a month since adolescents as young as 12 became eligible in the United States to receive the Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19, and nearly all reports have been positive: The vaccine is very effective in this age group, and the vast majority of kids experience mild side effects, if any — the same sore arm or mild flu-like symptoms seen among adults who get the shot.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended that everyone 12-years-old and older get vaccinated against COVID-19, and the rollout is well underway: According to the CDC, nearly 7 million U.S. teens and pre-teens (ages 12 through 17) have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, so far.

Still, soon after the FDA authorized the use of Pfizer's vaccine in young people, federal agencies began receiving reports of mild chest pain or other signs of possible heart inflammation (known as myocarditis) in a very small percentage of recently vaccinated teens.

CDC director Rochelle Walensky said at a White House briefing Friday that there have been more than 300 cases of heart inflammation reported among more than 20 million teens and young adults who have received one of the vaccines made by Moderna or Pfizer. She said that in the "vast majority" of cases, the inflammation went away.

An expert advisory committee to the health agency is expected to review the cases in more depth at a meeting Friday.

So, in the meantime, should parents of teens hesitate to have their kids vaccinated against COVID-19? Vaccine experts and the American Academy of Pediatrics say no, don't hesitate. It's good for doctors and patients to be aware that there might be a connection between the mRNA vaccines and heart inflammation, and to report to their pediatrician anything they see in that first week after vaccination. But it is also important, the CDC notes, to recognize that even if this does turn out to be an extremely rare side effect of the vaccine, "most patients who received care responded well to medicine and rest and quickly felt better." And the serious risks of COVID -19 — even for young healthy people — outweigh the risks of any possible side effects from the vaccine. Here are some questions you may have, and what's known:

What exactly is myocarditis?

Myocarditis is an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, also being investigated, is an inflammation of the sac around the heart.

Long before the pandemic, thousands of cases of myocarditis were diagnosed in the U.S. and around the world each year, often triggered by the body's immune response to infections. SARS-CoV-2 can trigger it, and so can cold viruses, and staph and strep and HIV. Other causes include toxins and allergies.

Symptoms include chest pain and shortness of breath. It's often mild enough to go unnoticed, but a full-blown case in adults can cause arrhythmias and heart failure that require careful treatment with multiple medications, and several months of strict rest. In a case study of seven teenagers who got myocarditis following vaccination published last week in the journal Pediatrics, all seven got better after routine treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs.

Pediatric cardiologist Dr. Stuart Berger of the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, a spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics, says vaccine-related myocarditis in teens is not all that worrisome. "Although they appear with some symptoms of chest pain, and maybe some findings on EKGs, all of the cases we've seen have been on the mild end of the spectrum," he says.

So, what's the concern?

Several hundred reports about the inflammation have been filed with the federal government's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS); that's a repository of reports sent in by health professionals and patients about any health events they spot in the hours or days after vaccinations. Many of the events reported turn out to be coincidental — not caused by a vaccine. The database is just meant as a starting point for further investigation and not proof of cause and effect. But as NPR's Geoff Brumfiel noted this week, "when millions of people are vaccinated within a short period, the total number of these reported events can look big."

That said, anecdotes reported by doctors in medical journals and reports to VAERS suggest that both of the mRNA vaccines authorized for use in the U.S. — the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines — might slightly increase the incidence of myocarditis in young people. In 2003, a report in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated the background incidence of myocarditis to be 1.13 cases in 100,000 children per year.

Paul Offit, professor of pediatrics at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and a member of a Food and Drug Administration vaccine advisory committee says there likely is a causal link between the heart inflammation some doctors are seeing in these teens and the second dose of vaccine. "I think it's real," he says, but hastens to add that the effect is exceedingly small – based on the data collected so far, maybe one in 50,000 vaccinees between the ages of 16 and 39. "And the good news is at least so far it looks to be transient and self-resolving."

Still, maybe I should wait to get my teen vaccinated and see how this plays out?

Uhm, no, according to several vaccine experts contacted by NPR. And this is where a little math comes in handy.

"Take a stadium full of 100,000 people between the ages of 16 and 39, which is the subset that appears to be at greater risk," Offit says. "Vaccinate all of them, and two might get myocarditis." But if you don't vaccinate any of the 100,000, he estimates that about 1,300 would eventually get COVID-19. And those numbers are likely to increase this winter.

About one in 1,000 children who get COVID-19 have gone on to develop a condition called MIS-C (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children), says Offit, and most of those kids have had some level of myocarditis. In addition, the new coronavirus has directly caused myocarditis in some children and adults. Which of the two stadiums in Offit's metaphor would have more cases of myocarditis — the vaccinated children or unvaccinated kids — is not known precisely. But Offit says he suspects it would be the unvaccinated group. And there's no doubt that 1,000 unvaccinated children would suffer more COVID-19-related illnesses. "A choice not to get a vaccine is not a choice to avoid myocarditis," he says. "It's a choice to take a different risk — and I would argue a more serious one" — of developing a bad case of COVID-19 or long-COVID or COVID-caused myocarditis.

Are the experts advising their own kids in this age group to get vaccinated?

Yes. "I understand people having concerns," says Dr. Judith Guzman-Cottrill. She's a parent and professor of pediatric infectious diseases at the Oregon Health and Science University, as well as the senior author on a small study that came out this month in the journal Pediatrics. In the report, Guzman-Cottrill and her colleagues analyzed the cases of seven boys around the country who developed myocarditis within four days of receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

She and her family recently faced the vaccination decision for her own 13-year-old daughter — and said a whole-hearted yes to the shot.

Guzman-Cottrill suspects there may turn out to be a slightly increased risk of heart inflammation from vaccination in young people, but she and her co-authors note in the Pediatrics report that a direct cause-and-effect connection — even in these seven cases — has yet to be established. And she's impressed that despite the millions of doses that have so far been delivered to teens, no clear and serious post-vaccination problems have shown up. "The emergency departments and urgent care clinics are not filled with teenagers complaining of chest pain," she says.

She's treated unvaccinated teens who developed severe myocarditis from an infection with the COVID-19 virus, and others who developed COVID-19 pneumonia and respiratory failure. Seeing those teens struggle — teens who lacked the powerful immune protection the vaccine provides — was enough for her to suggest vaccination to her daughter, who got her second vaccination earlier this week.

"She saw it as a pathway back to a normal post pandemic life," Guzman-Cottrill says.

And that's where public health comes in. "We really need a highly vaccinated student body when kids return to the classroom this fall," says Guzman-Cottrill, "so we don't see surges in COVID-19 cases."

Joanne Silberner, a former health policy correspondent for NPR, is a freelance journalist living in Seattle.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The pandemic has taken a massive toll on people's mental health. But a new report by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirms what many of us are seeing and feeling in our own lives: The impact has been particularly devastating for parents and unpaid caregivers of adults.

Two-thirds of survey respondents who identified as unpaid caregivers said they experienced mental health challenges during the pandemic, such as symptoms of anxiety or depression, or suicidal thoughts.

Only one-third of people with no caregiving responsibilities reported the same symptoms.

Of the more than 10,000 survey respondents, more than 40% identified as being unpaid caregivers.

"What is striking here is just how widespread unpaid caregiving responsibilities are in the population and how much of a burden and a toll these responsibilities" are having, says Shantha Rajaratnam, a co-author of the study and a psychologist at the Turner Institute of Brain and Mental Health at Monash University in Australia.

The study also found that people who care for both children under 18 and adults — many of them part of the sandwich generation — are faring the worst, with 85% of this group experiencing adverse mental health symptoms.

"It's an extremely important study," says psychologist Dolores Gallagher-Thompson, professor emeritus at Stanford University who has researched family caregivers and their challenges.

The study is the first to document the problems caregivers have experienced during COVID-19, she notes, and underscores "the importance of paying attention to caregiver issues, caregiver mental health" and the need for education and resources to better support them.

The contrast between caregivers and others is stark

The study, part of ongoing research by The COVID-19 Outbreak Public Evaluation (COPE) Initiative, is based on surveys conducted in December 2020 and February-March 2021.

More than half of those who identified as caregivers said they had experienced symptoms of anxiety or depression, or of disorders like PTSD related to the stress and trauma of COVID-19.

A significant number of caregivers said they had contemplated suicide. Nearly 40% reported having passive suicidal thoughts, meaning "wishing that they had gone to bed and didn't wake up," says study co-author Mark Czeisler, a graduate student at Monash University and a research trainee at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston.

And more than 30% had seriously considered taking their own life — about five times the number of noncaregivers, the study found.

Across the board, mental health impacts have been more severe for people who care for both children and adults. Half of this group said it had seriously considered suicide in the past month.

The pandemic worsened the challenges caregivers face

Even before the pandemic, being an unpaid caregiver was stressful and associated with a higher risk of mental health issues, says Gallagher-Thompson. The COVID-19 pandemic has made things even harder.

For instance, the pandemic has taken away many formal and informal sources of support for caregivers.

That was the case for Dr. Nicole Christian-Brathwaite. She's a Boston-based child psychiatrist and lives with her husband, her mother, her husband's father and two sons, who are 4 and 6.

Before the pandemic, her father-in-law, who has dementia, went to a day program for seniors with cognitive decline. Her mother, a survivor of breast and lung cancers, went to physical therapy twice a week, doctor appointments and met with friends.

When the pandemic hit, they lost those services and social support — at the same time Christian-Brathwaite and her husband began working from home while taking care of their sons and parents.

Life at home became much more complicated. Her sons developed behavioral problems with the transitions and stresses of the pandemic. Her mother struggled with chronic pain, and was hospitalized during the pandemic. And there were days when her father-in-law was confused, disoriented or aggressive.

"Many days I was walking around on edge waiting for something to happen because our entire setup was so very fragile and vulnerable," says Christian-Brathwaite. "It's been exhausting."

And her mental health has suffered. "I certainly was dealing with insomnia," she says. "I was short tempered. I was more irritable. I didn't have the same tolerance for things."

More support needed to help caregivers cope

The new study highlights the extent to which unpaid caregivers have struggled during the pandemic, says Gallagher-Thompson.

"There are some serious issues here that shouldn't be ignored," she says.

And yet caregivers are often ignored by the health system, which is set up to focus only on patients.

"Family members are rarely asked, 'How does this affect you? What is difficult? How can we help you? How can we support you in being able to carry out your role, your tasks, your responsibilities?'" Gallagher-Thompson says.

As the new study shows, support can make a big difference — respondents who could rely on others for help with caregiving had a lower incidence of mental health symptoms.

So it's important to educate and support caregivers. For example, physicians can start by screening their patients' caregivers for mental health symptoms and provide more resources to those who need it, says Gallagher-Thompson.

Christian-Brathwaite hopes the new study will help physicians recognize that family caregivers are just as important to consider while treating patients.

"We really need to take a step back and look at the village that's around them because our patients can't be successful without having the support from family," she says.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Reconstructions from the Daynès Studio in Paris depict a male Neanderthal (right) face to face with a human, Homo sapiens.; Credit: /Science Source

It's something that many of us reckon with: the sense that we're not quite as sharp as we once were.

I recently turned 42. Having lost my grandfather to Alzheimer's, and with my mom suffering from a similar neurodegenerative disease, I'm very aware of what pathologies might lurk beneath my cranium.

In the absence of a cure for Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia, the most important interventions for upholding brain function are preventive — those that help maintain our most marvelous, mysterious organ.

Based on the science, I take fish oil and broil salmon. I exercise. I try to challenge my cortex to the unfamiliar.

As I wrote my recent book, A History of the Human Brain, which recounts the evolutionary tale of how our brain got here, I began to realize that so many of the same influences that shaped our brain evolution in the first place reflect the very measures we use to preserve our cognitive function today.

Being social, and highly communicative. Exploring creative pursuits. Eating a varied, omnivorous diet low in processed foods. Being physically active.

These traits and behaviors help retrace our past, and, I believe, were instrumental in why we remain on the planet today.

And they all were, at least in part, enabled by our brain.

Social smart alecks finish first

The human saga is riddled with extinctions.

By "human," I don't just mean Homo sapiens, the species we belong to, but any member of the genus Homo. We've gotten used to being the only human species on Earth, but in our not so distant past — probably a few hundred thousand years ago – there were at least nine of us running around.

There was Homo habilis, or the "handy man." And Homo erectus, the first "pitcher." The Denisovans roamed Asia, while the more well-known Neanderthals spread throughout Europe.

But with the exception of Homo sapiens, they're all gone. And there's a good chance it was our fault.

Humans were never the fastest lot on the African plains, and far from the strongest. Cheetahs, leopards and lions held those distinctions. In our lineage, natural selection instead favored wits and wiliness.

Plenty of us became cat food, but those with a slight cognitive edge — especially Homo sapiens — lived on. In our ilk, smarts overcame strength and speed in enabling survival.

Ecology, climate, location and just sheer luck would've played important roles in who persisted or perished as well, as they do for most living beings. But the evolutionary pressure for more complex mental abilities would lead to a massive expansion in our brain's size and neurocircuitry that is surely the paramount reason we dominate the planet like no other species ever has.

Much of this "success," if you can call it that, was due to our social lives.

Primates are communal creatures. Our close monkey and ape cousins are incredibly interactive, grooming each other for hours a day to maintain bonds and relationships. Throw in a few hoots and hollers and you have a pretty complex community of communicating simians.

An active social life is now a known preserver of brain function.

Research shows that social isolation worsens cognitive decline (not to mention mental health, as many of us experienced this past year). Larger social networks and regular social activities are associated with mental preservation and slowed dementia progression.

Entwined in this new social life was an evolutionary pressure that favored innovation. Our eventual ability to generate completely novel thoughts and ideas, and to share those ideas, came to define our genus.

As we hunted and foraged together, and honed stones into hand axes, there was a collective creativity at work that gave us better weapons and tools that enabled more effective food sourcing, and, later, butchering and fire. Effectively sharing these innovations with our peers allowed information to spread faster than ever before - a seed for the larger communities and civilizations to come.

Challenging ourselves to new pursuits and mastering new skills can not only impress peers and ingratiate us to our group, but literally help preserve our brain. New hobbies. New conversations. Learning the banjo. Even playing certain video games and simply driving a new route home from work each day, as neuroscientist David Eagleman does, can keep our function high.

Whether it's honing ancient stone or taking up Sudoku, any pursuit novel and mentally challenging may help keep the neural circuits firing.

We really are what we eat

All the while, as we hunted and crafted in new and communal ways, we had to eat. And we did so with an uniquely adventurous palette.

Homo sapiens is among the most omnivorous species on the planet. Within reason we eat just about anything. Whether it's leaves, meat, fungus, or fruit, we don't discriminate. At some point, one of us even thought it might be a good idea to try the glistening, grey blobs that are oysters - and shellfish are, it turns out, among the healthiest foods for our brain.

The varied human diet is an integral part of our story. As was the near constant physicality required to source it.

On multiple occasions over the past 1 to 2 million years climate changes dried out the African landscape, forcing our ancestors out of the lush forest onto the dangerous, wide-open grasslands. As evolution pressured us to create and commune to help us survive, a diverse diet also supported our eventual global takeover.

Our arboreal past left us forever craving the dangling fruits of the forest, a supreme source of high-calorie sugars that ensured survival. Back then we didn't live long enough to suffer from Type 2 diabetes: if you encountered sweets, you ate them. And today we're stuck with a taste for cookies and candy that, given our longer lifespans, can take its toll on the body and brain.

But humans were just as amenable to dining on the bulbs, rhizomes and tubers of the savanna, especially once fire came along. We eventually became adept scavengers of meat and marrow, the spoils left behind by the big cats, who preferred more nutritive organ meat.

As our whittling improved we developed spears, and learned to trap and hunt the beasts of the plains ourselves. There is also evidence that we learned to access shellfish beds along the African coast and incorporate brain-healthy seafood into our diet.

Studying the health effects of the modern diet is tricky. Dietary studies are notoriously dubious, and often involve countless lifestyle variables that are hard to untangle.

Take blueberries. Multiple studies have linked their consumption with improved brain health. But, presumably, the berry-prone among us are also more likely to eat healthy all around, exercise, and make it to level 5 on their meditation app.

Which is why so many researchers, nutritionists, and nutritional psychiatrists now focus on dietary patterns, like those akin to Mediterranean culinary customs, rather than specific ingredients. Adhering to a Mediterranean diet is linked with preserved cognition; and multiple randomized-controlled trials suggest doing so can lower depression risk.

A similar diversity in our ancestral diet helped early humans endure an ever-shifting climate and times of scarcity. We evolved to subsist and thrive on a wide range of foods, in part because our clever brains allowed us access to them. In turn, a similarly-varied diet (minus submitting to our innate sugar craving of course) is among the best strategies to maintain brain health.

All of our hunting, and foraging, and running away from predators would have required intense physical exertion. This was certainly not unique to humans, but we can't ignore the fact that regular exercise is another effective means of preserving brain health.

Being active improves performance on mental tasks, and may help us better form memories. Long before the Peletons sold out, our brains relied on both mental and physical activity.

But overwhelmingly the evidence points to embracing a collection of lifestyle factors to keep our brain healthy, none of which existed in a Darwinian vacuum.

Finding food was as social an endeavor as it was mental and physical. Our creative brains harnessed information; gossiping, innovating, and cooking our spoils around the campfire.

Researchers are beginning to piece together the complex pathology behind the inevitable decline of the human brain, and despite a parade of failed clinical trials in dementia, there should be promising treatments ahead.

Until then, in thinking about preserving the conscious experience of our world and relationships — and living our longest, happiest lives — look to our past.

Bret Stetka is a writer based in New York and an editorial director at Medscape. His work has appeared in Wired, Scientific American, and on The Atlantic.com. His new book, A History of the Human Brain, is out from Timber/Workman Press. He's also on Twitter: @BretStetka.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The dangerous Delta variant of the coronavirus is spreading so quickly in the United States that it's likely the mutant strain will become predominant in the U.S. within weeks, according to a new analysis.

The variant, first identified in India, is the most contagious yet and, among those not yet vaccinated, may trigger serious illness in more people than other variants do, say scientists tracking the spread of infection.

The Delta variant apparently already accounts for at least 14% of all new infections, according to the research analysis posted online Monday of more than 242,000 infections nationwide over the last six months.

Another reason to get vaccinated

"It definitely is of concern," says William Lee, the vice president of science at Helix, which is under contract with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to help track the variants.

"Just the fact that it's so transmissible means that it's it's dangerous," Lee says, "and so I think you'll see outbreaks of Delta around the country and more people will get sick from it."

Helix launched the study when researchers spotted a drop in the prevalence of the Alpha variant, a contagious strain first spotted in the U.K. that had quickly become the dominant variant in that country and the U.S.

The researchers discovered the drop in relative frequency of the Alpha variant in their spot checks of strains circulating in the U.S. was due to a rapid increase in two other variants: the Gamma variant, first spotted in Brazil, and the Delta variant. The Gamma variant may be slightly better than the original strain at outmaneuvering the vaccines, researchers say.

"It looks like both of them are going to slowly push out Alpha," says Lee, whose study has not yet been peer-reviewed but has been posted on a pre-print server.

How Delta could prompt another U.S. COVID-19 surge

All the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S. appear, in general, to provide powerful protection against all the variants, including Delta. But the rapid spread of the variants is still raising concern because of the large number of people who remain unvaccinated.

"There still are big portions of the country where the rates of vaccination are quite low," notes Dr. Jeremy Luban, a virologist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. "And, in fact, the Helix paper shows that this Delta variant is increasing in frequency — the speed at which it's increasing in frequency is greatest in those areas where vaccination rates are lowest."

The Delta variant could trigger yet another moderate surge of infections through many parts of the U.S. because of these pockets of unvaccinated people, according to a recent set of projections from the COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub, which is helping the CDC plot the future course of the pandemic.

The projections indicate that infections could start to rise again as soon as some time in July, especially if the vaccination campaign continues to stall.

"For the most part, it's a moderate resurgence," says Justin Lessler, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University who is helping coordinate the hub.

"We're not having massive epidemics at a national level, but we have this kind of continuation of the virus just sticking around and keeping us on our toes," Lessler says. "And in specific places there could be substantial epidemics still."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: /Rose Wong for NPR/KHN

Claire Lang-Ree was in a lab coat taking a college chemistry class remotely in the kitchen of her Colorado Springs, Colo., home, when a profound pain twisted into her lower abdomen. She called her mom, Jen Lang-Ree, a nurse practitioner who worried it was appendicitis and found a nearby hospital in the family's health insurance network.

After a long wait in the emergency room of Penrose Hospital, Claire received morphine and an anti-nausea medication delivered through an IV. She also underwent a CT scan of her abdomen and a series of tests.

Hospital staffers ruled out appendicitis and surmised Claire was suffering from a ruptured ovarian cyst, which can be a harmless part of the menstrual cycle but can also be problematic and painful. After a few days — and a chemistry exam taken through gritted teeth — the pain went away.

Then the bill came.

Patient: Claire Lang-Ree, a 21-year-old Stanford University student who was living in Colorado for a few months while taking classes remotely. She's insured by Anthem Blue Cross through her mom's work as a pediatric nurse practitioner in Northern California.

Total Bill: $18,735.93, including two $722.50 fees for a nurse to "push" drugs into her IV, a process that takes seconds. Anthem's negotiated charges were $6,999 for the total treatment. Anthem paid $5,578.30, and the Lang-Rees owed $1,270.45 to the hospital, plus additional bills for radiologists and other care. (Claire also anted up a $150 copay at the ER.)

Service Provider: Penrose Hospital in Colorado Springs, part of the regional health care network Centura Health.

What Gives: As hospitals disaggregate charges for services once included in an ER visit, a hospitalization or a surgical procedure, there has been a proliferation of newfangled fees to increase billing. In the health field, this is called "unbundling." It's analogous to the airlines now charging extra for each checked bag or for an exit row seat. Over time, in the medical industry, this has led to separate fees for ever-smaller components of care. A charge to put medicine into a patient's IV line — a "push fee" — is one of them.

Though the biggest charge on Claire's bill, $9,885.73, was for a CT scan, in many ways Claire and her mom found the push fees most galling. (Note to readers: Scans are frequently many times more expensive when ordered in an ER than in other settings.)

"That was so ridiculous," says Claire, who adds she had previously taken the anti-nausea drug they gave her; it's available in tablet form for the price of a cup of coffee, no IV necessary. "It works really well. Why wasn't that an option?"

In Colorado, the average charge for the code corresponding to Claire's first IV push has nearly tripled since 2014, and the dollars hospitals actually get for the procedure has doubled. In Colorado Springs specifically, the cost for IV pushes rose even more sharply than it did statewide.

A typical nurse in Colorado Springs makes about $35 an hour. At that rate, it would take nearly 21 hours to earn the amount of money Penrose charged for a push of plunger that likely took seconds or at most minutes.

The hospital's charge for just one "IV push" was more than Claire's portion of the monthly rent in the home she shared with roommates. In the end, Anthem did not pay the push fees in its negotiated payment. But claims data shows that in 2020 Penrose typically received upward of $1,000 for the first IV push. And patients who didn't have an insurer to dismiss such charges would be stuck with them. Colorado hospitals on average received $723 for the same code, according to the claims database.

"It's insane the variation that we see in prices, and there's no rhyme or reason," says Cari Frank with the Center for Improving Value in Health Care, a Colorado nonprofit that runs a statewide health care claims database. "It's just that they've been able to negotiate those prices with the insurance company and the insurance company has decided to pay it."

To put the total cost in context, Penrose initially charged more money for Claire's visit than the typical Colorado hospital would have charged for helping someone give birth, according to data published by the Colorado Division of Insurance.

Even with the negotiated rate, "it was only $1,000 less than an average payment for having a baby," Frank says.

In an email statement, Centura said it "conducted a thorough review and determined all charges were accurate" and went on to explain that "an Emergency Room (ER) must be prepared for anything and everything that comes through the doors," requiring highly trained staff, plus equipment and supplies. "All of this adds up to large operating costs and can translate into patient responsibility."

As researchers have found, little stands in the way of hospitals charging through the roof, especially in a place like an emergency room, where a patient has few choices. A report from National Nurses United found that hospital markups have more than doubled since 1999, according to data from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. In an email, Anthem called the trend of increasing hospital prices "alarming" and "unsustainable."

But Ge Bai, an associate professor of accounting and health policy at Johns Hopkins University, says when patients see big bills it isn't only the hospital's doing — a lot depends on the insurer, too. For one, the negotiated price depends on the negotiating power of the payer, in this case, Anthem.

"Most insurance companies don't have comparable negotiating or bargaining power with the hospital," said Bai. Prices in a state like Michigan, where Bai said the UAW union covers a big proportion of Michigan patients, will look very different from those in Colorado.

Also, insurers are not the wallet defenders patients might assume them to be.

"In many cases, insurance companies don't negotiate as aggressively as they can, because they earn profit from the percentage of the claims," she says. The more expensive the actual payment is, the more money they get to extract.

Though Anthem negotiated away the push fees, it paid the hospital 30% more than the average Level IV emergency department visit in Colorado that year, and it paid quadruple what Medicare would allow for her CT scan.

Resolution: Claire and her mom decided to fight the bill, writing letters to the hospital and searching for information on what the procedures should have cost. The cost of the IV pushes and CT scan infuriated them — the hospital wanted more than double for a CT than what top-rated hospitals typically charged in 2019.

But the threat of collections wore them out and ultimately they paid their assigned share of the bill — $1,420.45, which was mostly coinsurance.

"Eventually it got to the point where I was like, 'I don't really want to go to collections, because this might ruin my credit score,'" says Claire, who didn't want to graduate from college with dinged credit.

Bai and Frank say the state of Maryland can provide a useful benchmark for medical bills, since it sets the prices that hospitals can charge for each procedure. Data provided by the Maryland Health Care Commission shows that Anthem and Claire paid seven times what she likely would have paid for the CT scan there, and nearly 10 times what they likely would have paid for the emergency department Level IV visit. In Maryland, intravenous pushes typically cost about $200 apiece in 2019. A typical Maryland hospital would have received only about $1,350 from a visit like Claire's, and the Lang-Rees would have been on the hook for about $270.

Claire's pain has come back a few times, but never as bad as that night in Colorado. She has avoided reentering an emergency room since then. After visiting multiple specialists back home in California, she learned she might have had a condition called ovarian torsion.

The Takeaway: Even at an in-network facility and with good insurance, patients can get hurt financially by visiting the ER. A few helpful documents can help guide the way to fighting such charges. The first is an itemized bill.

"I just think it's wrong in the U.S. to charge so much," says Jen Lang-Ree. "It's just a little side passion of mine to look at those and make sure I'm not being scammed."

Bai, of Johns Hopkins, suggests asking for an itemized explanation of benefits from the insurance company, too. That will show what the hospital actually received for each procedure.

Find out if the hospital massively overcharged. The Medicare price lookup tool can be useful for getting a benchmark. And publicly available data on health claims in Colorado and at least 17 other states can help, too.

Vincent Plymell with the Colorado Division of Insurance encourages patients to reach out if something on a bill looks sketchy. "Even if it's not a plan we regulate," he wrote in an email, departments such as his "can always arm the consumer with info."

Finally, make scrutinizing such charges fun. Claire and Jen made bill-fighting their mother-daughter hobby for the winter. They recommend pretzel chips and cocktails to boost the mood.

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by KHN and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have an interesting medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it!

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Moderna says recently completed studies have found its vaccine to have a neutralizing effect against all COVID-19 variants tested, including the delta variant.; Credit: Fred Tanneau/AFP via Getty Images

Studies have found that Moderna's COVID-19 vaccine is effective against several variants of concern, including the delta variant, the biotech company announced.

Moderna said Tuesday that recently completed studies have found the vaccine to have a neutralizing effect against all COVID-19 variants tested, including the beta, delta, eta and kappa variants.

While still highly effective against the delta variant, the study showed the vaccine was less effective against it and certain other variants than against the original strain of the virus.

The antibody response against the delta variant was about two times weaker than against the ancestral strain of the virus.

The news echoes other findings that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are highly effective against the delta variant. A study published this month in Nature found that Pfizer's vaccine was able to neutralize variants including delta, though at somewhat reduced strength.

"These new data are encouraging and reinforce our belief that the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine should remain protective against newly detected variants," Stéphane Bancel, Moderna's chief executive officer, said in a statement. "These findings highlight the importance of continuing to vaccinate populations with an effective primary series vaccine."

The company also said it is developing a booster candidate: a 50-50 mix of its currently authorized COVID-19 vaccine and another messenger RNA vaccine it has developed.

The delta variant is spreading fast

The delta variant is the fast-moving form of the coronavirus that is now found in 96 countries, including the United States.

Last week, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health said the delta variant is "currently the greatest threat in the U.S. to our attempt to eliminate COVID-19," noting that the proportion of infections being caused by the variant is doubling every two weeks.

The delta variant is now infecting at least 1 out of every 5 people who get the virus in the United States. In some sections of the country, the variant is already far more common, particularly in parts of the Midwest and West. At its current pace, the delta variant is expected to be the dominant virus in the U.S. within weeks.

Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, an infectious disease expert at the World Health Organization, called the delta variant "incredibly transmissible."

"These viruses are becoming more fit. The virus is evolving, and this is natural," she told NPR's Morning Edition. "It's more transmissible than the alpha variant, so we need to just do all we can to prevent as many infections as we can and do what we can do to reduce the spread."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Many hospitals around the country, including Medstar Washington Hospital in Washington DC., have started sharing their prices online in compliance with a recent federal rule.; Credit: DANIEL SLIM/AFP via Getty Images

A colonoscopy might cost you or your insurer a few hundred dollars — or several thousand, depending on which hospital or insurer you use.

Long hidden, such price variations are supposed to be available in stark black and white under a Trump administration price transparency rule that took effect at the start of this year. It requires hospitals to post a range of actual prices — everything from the rates they offer cash-paying customers to costs negotiated with insurers.

Many have complied.

But some hospitals bury the data deep on their websites or have not included all the categories of prices required, according to industry analysts. A sizable minority of hospitals have not disclosed the information at all.

While imperfect and potentially of limited use right now to the average consumer, the disclosures that are available illustrate the huge differences in prices — nationally, regionally and within the same hospital. But they're challenging for consumers and employers to use, giving a boost to a cottage industry that analyzes the data.

While it's still an unanswered question whether price transparency will lead to overall lower prices, KHN took a dive into the initial trove of data to see what it reveals. Here are five takeaways from the newly public data and tips for how you might be able to use it to your benefit

1) As expected, prices are all over the map

The idea behind the requirement to release prices is that the transparency may prompt consumers to shop around, weighing cost and quality. Perhaps they could save a few hundred dollars by getting their surgery or imaging test across town instead of at the nearby clinic or hospital.

Under the Trump-era rule, hospitals must post what they accept from all insurers for thousands of line items, including each drug, procedure or treatment they provide. In addition, hospitals must present this in a format easily readable by computers and include a consumer-friendly separate listing of 300 "shoppable" services, bundling the full price a hospital accepts for a given treatment, such as having a baby or getting a hip replacement.

The negotiated rates now being posted publicly often show an individual hospital accepting a wide range of prices for the same service, depending on the insurer, often based on how much negotiating power each has in a market.

In some cases, the cash-only price is less than what insurers pay. And prices may vary widely within the same city or region.

In Virginia, for example, the average price of a diagnostic colonoscopy is $2,763, but the range across the state is from $208 to $10,563, according to a database aggregated by San Diego-based Turquoise Health, one of the new firms looking to market the data to businesses, while offering some information free of charge to patients.

2) Patients can look up the information, but it's incomplete

Patients can try to find the price information themselves by searching hospital websites, but even locating the correct tab on a hospital's website is tricky.

Typically, consumers don't comparison-shop, preferring to choose convenience or the provider their doctor recommends. A recent Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker brief, for instance, found that 85% of adults said they had not researched online the price of a hospital treatment.

And hospitals say the transparency push alone won't help consumers much, because each patient's situation is different and may vary from the average— and individual deductibles and insurance plans complicate matters.

But if you do want to try, here's one tip: "You can Google the hospital name and the words 'price transparency' and see where that takes you," says Caitlin Sheetz, director and head of analytics at the consulting firm ADVI Health in the Washington, D.C., metro area.

Typing in "MedStar Health hospital transparency," for example, likely points to the MedStar Washington Hospital Center's "price transparency disclosure" page, with a link to its full list of prices, as well as its separate list of 300 shoppable services.

By clicking on the list of shoppable services, consumers can download an Excel file. Searching it for "colonoscopy" pulls up several variations of the procedure, along with prices for different insurers, such as Aetna and Cigna, but a "not available" designation for the cash-only price. The file explains that MedStar does not have a standard cash price but makes determinations case by case.

Performing the same Google search for the nearby Inova health system results in less useful information.

Inova's website links to a long list of thousands of charges, which are not the discounts negotiated by insurers, and the list is not easily searchable. The website advises those who are not Inova patients or who would like to create their own estimate to log into the hospitals' "My Chart" system, but a search on that for "colonoscopy" failed to produce any data.

3) Third-party firms are trying to make searching prices simpler – and cash in

Because of the difficulty of navigating these websites — or locating the negotiated prices once there — some consumers may turn to sites like Turquoise. Another such firm is Health Cost Labs, which will have pricing information for 2,300 hospitals in its database when it goes live July 1.

Doing a similar search for "colonoscopy" on Turquoise shows the prices at MedStar by insurer, but the process is still complicated. First, a consumer must select the "health system" button from the website's menu of options, click on "surgical procedures," then click again on "digestive" to get to it.

There is no similar information for Inova because the hospital has not yet made its data accessible in a computer-friendly format, said Chris Severn, CEO of Turquoise.

Inova spokesperson Tracy Connell said in a written statement that the health system will create personalized estimates for patients and is "currently working to post information on negotiated prices and discounts on services."

Firms like Turquoise and Health Cost Labs aim to sell the data gathered from hospitals nationally to insurers, employers and others. In turn, those groups may use it in negotiations with hospitals over future prices. While that may drive down prices in areas with a lot of competition, it might do the opposite where there are few hospitals to choose from, or in situations where a hospital raises its prices to match competitors.

4) Consumers could use this data to negotiate, especially if they're paying cash

For consumers who go the distance and can find price data from their hospitals, it may prove helpful in certain situations:

• Patients who are paying cash or who have unmet deductibles may want to compare prices among hospitals to see if driving farther could save them money.
• Uninsured patients could ask the hospital for the cash price or attempt to negotiate for the lowest amount the facility accepts from insurers.
• Insured patients who get a bill for out-of-network care may find the information helpful because it could empower them to negotiate a discount off the hospitals' gross charges for that care.

While there's no guarantee of success, "if you are uninsured or out of network, you could point to some of those prices and say, 'That's what I want,'" says Barak Richman, a contract law expert and professor of law at Duke University School of Law.

But the data may not help insured patients who notice their prices are higher than those negotiated by other insurers.

In those cases, legal experts say the insured patients are unlikely to get a bill changed because they have a contract with that insurer, which has negotiated the price with their contracted hospitals.

"Legally, a contract is a contract," says Mark Hall, a health law professor at Wake Forest University.

Richman agrees.

"You can't say, 'Well, you charged that person less,'" he notes, but neither can they say they'll charge you more.

Getting the data, however, relies on the hospital having posted it.

5) Hospitals still aren't really on board

When it comes to compliance, "we're seeing the range of the spectrum," says Jeffrey Leibach, a partner at the consulting firm Guidehouse, which found earlier this year that about 60% of 1,000 hospitals surveyed had posted at least some data, but 30% had reported nothing at all.

Many in the hospital industry have long fought transparency efforts, even filing a lawsuit seeking to block the new rule. The suit was dismissed by a federal judge last year.

They argue the rule is unclear and overly burdensome. Additionally, hospitals haven't wanted their prices exposed, knowing that competitors might then adjust theirs, or health plans could demand lower rates. Conversely, lower-cost hospitals might decide to raise prices to match competitors.

The rule stems from requirements in the Affordable Care Act. The Obama administration required hospitals to post their chargemaster rates, which are less useful because they are generally inflated, hospital-set amounts that are almost never what is actually paid.

Insurers and hospitals are also bracing for next year when even more data is set to come online. Insurers will be required to post negotiated prices for medical care across a broader range of facilities, including clinics and doctors' offices.

In May, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services sent letters to some of the hospitals that have not complied, giving them 90 days to do so or potentially face penalties, including a $300-a-day fine.

"A lot of members say until hospitals are fully compliant, our ability to use the data is limited," says Shawn Gremminger, director of health policy at the Purchaser Business Group on Health, a coalition of large employers.

His group and others have called for increasing the penalty for noncomplying hospitals from $300 a day to $300 a bed per day, so "the fine would be bigger as the hospital gets bigger," Gremminger says. "That's the kind of thing they take seriously."

Already, though, employers or insurers are eyeing the hospital data as leverage in negotiations, says Severn, Turquoise's CEO. Conversely, some employers may use it to fire their insurers if the rates they're paying are substantially more than those agreed to by other carriers.

"It will piss off anyone who is overpaying for health care, which happens for various reasons," he says.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation).

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

People rest while riding a Los Angeles Metro Rail train amid the coronavirus pandemic on April 1, 2020 in Los Angeles, California.; Credit: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Despite the racial reckoning going on in America right now, and despite the fact that attitudes towards race, inclusion and representation are different now than they were 30 years ago, new research from UC Berkeley shows that a large majority of American metro areas are more segregated now than they were in 1990. The new report from Berkeley’s Institute covers a number of topic areas, but among the key findings were from the national segregation report component of the project, which found Los Angeles to be the sixth-most segregated metro area with more than 200,000 people.

Today on AirTalk, we’ll talk with the lead researcher on the new report and a local historian to talk about how we see the findings of the report play out in Southern California.

Guests:

Stephen Menendian, assistant director and director of research at the Othering & Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley, which works to identify and eliminate the barriers to an inclusive, just, and sustainable society in order to create transformative change; he tweets @SMenendian

Eric Avila, professor of history, urban planning, and Chicano/a studies at UCLA

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Sherman Institute, built in the Mission Revival architectural style, enrolled its first students on Sept. 9, 1902.; Credit: SHERMAN INDIAN MUSEUM

Earlier this month, Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland announced an effort to search federal boarding schools for burial sites of Native American kids. 

The effort is similar to the one in Canada, which found the remains of up to 751 people, likely mostly children, at an unmarked grave in a defunct school in the province of Saskatchewan.  

We dive into the history of American Indian Boarding Schools, as well as their evolution and what the schools that still exist, including Sherman Institute High School in California, look like today.

Guests:

Brenda Child, professor of American Studies and American Indian Studies at the University of Minnesota; she is the author of many books, including “Boarding School Seasons: American Indian Families, 1900-1940” (University of Nebraska Press, 2000)

Amanda Wixon, curator at the Sherman Indian Museum, which is on the campus of Sherman Indian High School; assistant curator at Autry museum of the American West; PhD candidate in history at UC Riverside where her research is in Native American history, especially federal boarding schools and the carceral aspects of the Sherman Institute

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Facemasks remain worn as firefighter paramedic Jorge Miranda, holding syringe, speaks with Eduardo Vasquez, who has lived homeless on the streets of Los Angeles since 1992, before administering the one-shot Johnson and Johnson' Janssen Covid-19 vaccine as part of outreach to the homeless by members of the Los Angeles Fire Department's Covid Outreach unit on June 14, 2021 in Los Angeles.; Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images

In our continuing series looking at the latest medical research and news on COVID-19, Larry Mantle speaks with UCSF’s Dr. Peter Chin-Hong. 

Topics today include:

• Two weeks after reopening, LA County’s new COVID-19 cases have doubled

• CDC: Infected vaccinated people carry less COVID-19 virus

• Delta variant is now detected in all 50 states

• J&J: “At present, there is no evidence to suggest need for a booster dose to be administered”

• Novavax claims vaccine’s overall efficacy is 89.7%

• Another respiratory virus is spreading in the U.S.

• Curevac’s final trial show shot is far less effective than other vaccines

• Can we now live with the coronavirus?

• Israel scrambles to curb rising COVID-19 infection rates

• Is it time to rethink “one-size-fits-all” approach for masking?

Guest:

Peter Chin-Hong, M.D., infectious disease specialist and professor of medicine at the UCSF Medical Center; he tweets @PCH_SF

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A homeless encampment is pictured at Venice Beach, on June 30, 2021 in Venice, California, where an initiative began this week offering people in homeless encampments a voluntary path to permanent housing.; Credit: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images

The majority of unhoused women across the nation — 57% according to recent data — say domestic violence is the direct cause of losing their permanent home. 

In L.A, almost 40% of women who are homeless say they’ve experienced abuse in the last 12 months.

The choice they’ve been forced to make: Stay in danger with their abusers — or escape, with nowhere to go.

“It’s like jumping from a burning building but there’s no net to catch you,” said Nikki Brown, a survivor and advocate.

There are many, complex reasons why survivors become homeless. Shame is one of them. Yet studies show that one in three women experience some form of intimate partner abuse in their lives. So why don’t we talk about it more?

“It's the greatest secret that's super common and nobody wants to admit it,” said Brown. “There are so many complicated circumstances that make it really hard to leave. And when you can't leave, that element of shame and blame is the thing that makes it so hard to talk about.”

Today on AirTalk, we’re learning more about reporter Julia Paskin’s series Pushed Out, on domestic violence and homelessness in Los Angeles. Do you have an experience you want to share? Give us a call at 866-893-5722.

Guests:

Julia Paskin, KPCC producer and reporter who created the “Pushed Out” series; she tweets @JuliaPaskinInc

Amy Turk, CEO of Downtown Women’s Center, which advocates and offers services for women experiencing homelessness and formerly homeless women; she tweets @AmyFTurk

Nikki Brown, staff attorney at Community Legal Aid SoCal, where she has clients that are domestic violence survivors

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Detail of boxes with the U.S. donated Johnson & Johnson vaccine against Covid-19 at Universidad de Baja California on June 17, 2021 in Tijuana, Baja California. ; Credit: Francisco Vega/Getty Images

In our continuing series looking at the latest medical research and news on COVID-19, Larry Mantle speaks with Dr. Annabelle De St. Maurice from University of California Los Angeles/Mattel Children’s hospital.

Topics today include:

• J&J says its vaccine is effective against Delta variant

  • J&J vaccine lasts at least 8 months

• WHO says all vaccines it authorized should be recognized by reopening countries

• White House says it will miss July 4 vaccination goal

• Postpartum depression on the rise during the pandemic

• Experts believe Novavax may play a role in combating vaccine hesitancy

• Delta variant is not driving a surge in hospitalization rates in England

Guest: 

Annabelle De St. Maurice, M.D., assistant professor of pediatrics in the division of infectious diseases and the co-chief infection prevention officer at University of California Los Angeles/Mattel Children’s hospital; she tweets @destmauricemd

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Athletes compete during the cycling portion of the IRONMAN 70.3 Steelhead on June 27, 2021 in Benton Harbor, Michigan. ; Credit: Patrick McDermott/Getty Images for IRONMAN

Whether you’re new to running or you’ve finished your tenth triathlon, we want to hear from you about what motivates you and how that translates into pushing yourself physically. 

Guests: 

Mark Remy, longtime runner and writer in Portland, Oregon; creator of humor website dumbrunner.com; he is the author of many books, including The Runner's Rule Book: Everything a Runner Needs to Know--And Then Some (Runner's World) (Rodale Books, 2009)

Sharon McNary, infrastructure correspondent at KPCC; she finished her 11th Ironman Race last week at Coeur d’Alene; she tweets @KPCCsharon

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

A passenger wearing a protective face covering to combat the spread of the coronavirus, checks her phone while travelling on a bus along Oxford Street in central London on July 5, 2021.; Credit: DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AFP via Getty Images

In our continuing series looking at the latest medical research and news on COVID-19, Larry Mantle speaks with Professor Kristen Choi of UCLA. 

Topics today include:

• Biden to announce new efforts on vaccination campaign as Delta variant spreads

• Hospitalization rates getting worse for black residents of L.A. County 

• Which parts of the U.S. could be breeding grounds for variants?

• New Israeli data about effectiveness of Pfizer against Delta variant

• England to lift mask restrictions

• Cases on rise in immigration detention centers in the U.S. 

• Bay area zoo is vaccinating big cats and some other animals 

Guest:

Kristen R. Choi, professor of nursing and public health at UCLA; registered nurse practicing at Gateways Hospital, based in Echo Park

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

In this photo taken on February 10, 2020 a 'love kit' is seen on the bed in a room at the Dragonfly hotel in Mumbai.; Credit: PUNIT PARANJPE/AFP via Getty Images

A new survey shows that in the era of widespread vaccine availability, American couples are more satisfied in their relationships -- and some are even getting more experimental than they have been.

Led by Indiana University Kinsey Institute researcher Justin Lehmiller in collaboration with the website Lovehoney, which describes itself as “global sexual happiness experts,” the report looked at responses from 2,000 U.S. adults age 18-45, including an oversample of 200 who identified as LGBTQ, and among the major findings of the survey were that more than half (51 percent) of respondents said their sexual interests had changed during the pandemic, and many of those said they’d started trying things they hadn’t before. It also found that 44 percent of people surveyed said they were communicating better with their partner, and among singles surveyed 52 percent say they’re less interested in casual sex and more than a third of them said they weren’t interested in having sex on the first date.

Today on AirTalk, we’ll talk with Professor Lehmiller about the survey, its findings and how the pandemic impacted Americans’ views on relationships and sex.

Guest: 

Justin Lehmiller, social psychologist and research fellow at Indiana University’s Kinsey Institute who conducted the “Summer of Love” survey; author of “Tell Me What You Want: The Science of Sexual Desire and How It Can Help You Improve Your Sex Life” (Hachette Go, July 2020); host of the “Sex and Psychology” podcast; he tweets @JustinLehmiller

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

The Solar System is full of its own tricks and treats, so discover some of our favorites below.

For two decades now, and counting, the LANDFIRE program continues to assemble the most easy-to-use, intuitive and complete clearinghouse of remote sensing data products for wildland fire managers. 

Over the past century, technological advancements have vastly improved volcano monitoring. One key innovation was the introduction of modern borehole tiltmeters, devices that measure very small changes in the inclination of the volcano’s surface.  

Restoration of the imperiled sagebrush biome will require tools that assist resource managers in determining which restoration practices are most effective, and when and where restoration efforts will lead to the most ecosystem recovery. New research from USGS and Colorado State University provides biome-wide insights and spatially explicit tools that can inform restoration practices. 

USGS groundwater and surface water monitoring data contributed to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's (PaDEP) November 1, 2024, declarations of drought watches and warnings for 35 Pennsylvania counties.

NASA released a workshop report on the UNBOUND-FEW workshop series, which was facilitated in part by Tribal Resilience Learning Network staff from the Alaska CASC. The workshop report reveals key recommendations for making data tools more useful for climate adaptation planning.

The Pathfinding Partnerships Award from CO-LABS recognizes impactful, collaborative research projects organized by four or more research entities, including federal labs, in Colorado. This year, the Wildfire Research (WiRē) team received this award for their support of evidence-based community wildfire education to help communities live with wildfire. 

Western Fisheries Research Center scientists are studying the impacts of increased artificial light at night (ALAN) on aquatic ecosystems.  Here's an overview with recent pictures from the field!

Geologic mapping has been one of the most fundamental mandates of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) since its establishment in 1879. Congress created the USGS to "classify the public lands and examine the geological structure, mineral resources, and products within and outside the national domain."

From humble beginnings, the CRC collections have grown into an expansive 80,000 square foot warehouse space, which provides ample storage for 64,000 cores and well cuttings. This enhancement not only maximizes storage capacity but also offers invaluable resources to researchers from academia, industry, and state and federal governments. 

At the tops of many mountains and along numerous roads across the USA are small brass disks called benchmarks.  These survey points are critical for mapping the landscape, determining boundaries, and documenting changes, and there are hundreds of them in Yellowstone National Park!

A new study from USGS describes a previously unknown process of marine mineral formation in the Arctic Ocean, driven by frictional heating along tectonic faults rather than by hydrothermal activity. 

Lawmakers in Washington, D.C., have reached a preliminary, bipartisan agreement on police reform after months of closely watched debate on the topic.

Sens. Tim Scott, R-S.C., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., announced the agreement on Thursday evening.

"After months of working in good faith, we have reached an agreement on a framework addressing the major issues for bipartisan police reform," the lawmakers said in a joint statement.

"There is still more work to be done on the final bill, and nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. Over the next few weeks we look forward to continuing our work toward getting a finalized proposal across the finish line."

The exact details of the plan were not immediately clear.

The issue of reforming qualified immunity, to make it easier to sue police officers over allegations of brutality, had been a sticking point in negotiations. The police use of chokeholds was another debated provision.

The effort to reform U.S. policing comes after several years of increasing pressure to better understand and regulate the way officers interact with the communities they patrol.

The high-profile deaths of several Black people — many unarmed — at the hands of police — who have in some notable instances been white — have been the catalyst for the police reform movement.

The Democratic-led House had approved the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act — named after one of those Black people killed by police — in early March, and President Biden had hoped Congress would pass the reform effort by the first anniversary of Floyd's death in late May.

But Bass had said then that getting "a substantive piece of legislation" is "far more important than a specific date."

Floyd's murderer, former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, is set to be sentenced to prison on Friday.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement Thursday that Biden "is grateful to Rep. Bass, Sen. Booker, and Sen. Scott for all of their hard work on police reform, and he looks forward to collaborating with them on the path ahead."

The topic of police reform has divided the nation across party lines, with progressives accusing the right of seeking to maintain an antiquated and all-too-powerful law enforcement apparatus. Conservatives say the left has blamed the actions of some officers on the institution itself, turning the topic of police support and "blue lives" into more ammunition for the ongoing culture war.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division speaks during a news conference Friday announcing a lawsuit against the state of Georgia for its new voting law. Attorney General Merrick Garland is at right.; Credit: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Friday that the U.S. Justice Department is suing the state of Georgia over its new voting law, saying that the controversial measure is intended to restrict ballot access to Black voters.

"Our complaint alleges that recent changes to Georgia's election laws were enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of Black Georgians to vote on account of their race or color, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act," Garland said at a news conference.

The lawsuit marks the first major action from the Biden administration to combat a series of new restrictive voting measures passed by Republican-led state legislatures. And it came on the eighth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision to gut another key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act, Section 5.

Garland noted that Georgia experienced record voter turnout and participation in the 2020 election cycle.

In March, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, signed Senate Bill 202, a 98-page omnibus measure that makes sweeping changes to the state's absentee voting rules, adds new voter identification mandates and nearly cuts in half the amount of time for voters to request a mail-in ballot. It also expands early voting access for most counties and formally codifies Sunday voting hours as optional.

The legislation outlaws passing out food or drinks to voters within 150 feet of a polling place or too close to voters waiting in line, a provision that Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who heads the department's Civil Rights Division, highlighted at the press conference.

"Historically, minority voters in Georgia have been disproportionately more likely to wait in long lines to vote in person on Election Day," she said. "Given those long and protracted wait times, civic groups, including churches, have at times provided food and water to voters in line to make their wait more comfortable. As we allege in our complaint, this needless ban was passed with unlawful discriminatory intent."

Clarke also said the Georgia Legislature passed the bill through "a rushed process that departed from normal practice and procedure."

"The version of the bill that passed the state Senate ... was three pages long. Days later, the bill ballooned into over 90 pages in the House. The House held less than two hours of floor debate on the newly inflated SB 202 before Gov. Kemp signed it into law the same day," she said. "These legislative actions occurred at a time when the Black population in Georgia continues to steadily increase, and after a historic election that saw record voter turnout across the state, particularly for absentee voting, which Black voters are now more likely to use than white voters."

Garland said the lawsuit is the first of "many steps" the department is taking to protect the right to vote for all eligible voters. He said the Civil Rights Division will continue to examine voting laws that other states have passed.

"We will not hesitate to act," Garland said.

The Justice Department announced this month it would vigorously defend voting rights. Garland said that the department will double the number of voter enfranchisement lawyers and focus attention on litigation related to voting rights.

In response to the filing, Kemp said the lawsuit is "born out of the lies and misinformation the Biden administration has pushed against Georgia's Election Integrity Act from the start."

"[Biden and his allies] are weaponizing the U.S. Department of Justice to carry out their far-left agenda that undermines election integrity and empowers federal government overreach in our democracy," he said in a statement.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, another Republican who notably defended the state's administration of the 2020 election, said in a statement he "looks forward to ... beating [the administration] in court."

Garland's announcement comes just days after Senate Republicans united to block Democrats' attempts to pass sweeping voting rights legislation.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., tweeted his approval of the lawsuit shortly after the announcement Friday.

"If Republicans think the fight for voting rights ended with their filibuster of the For the People Act, they are sorely mistaken," he wrote. "Glad to see the Biden Administration is joining this effort. We must protect our democracy."

The Republican National Committee also linked the failed Senate vote to the Department of Justice's lawsuit.

"After failing to sell the partisan federal election takeover known as H.R. 1 to the American people, Joe Biden is now weaponizing the Justice Department to attack election integrity," RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, who read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record and confronted Barack Obama about nuclear weapons during a later presidential run, has died. He was 91.; Credit: Charles Dharapak/AP

SEASIDE, Calif. — Mike Gravel, a former U.S. senator from Alaska who read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record and confronted Barack Obama about nuclear weapons during a later presidential run, has died. He was 91.

Gravel, who represented Alaska as a Democrat in the Senate from 1969 to 1981, died Saturday, according to his daughter, Lynne Mosier. Gravel had been living in Seaside, California, and was in failing health, said Theodore W. Johnson, a former aide.

Gravel's two terms came during tumultuous years for Alaska when construction of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline was authorized and when Congress was deciding how to settle Alaska Native land claims and whether to classify enormous amounts of federal land as parks, preserves and monuments.

He had the unenviable position of being an Alaska Democrat when some residents were burning President Jimmy Carter in effigy for his measures to place large sections of public lands in the state under protection from development.

Gravel feuded with Alaska's other senator, Republican Ted Stevens, on the land matter, preferring to fight Carter's actions and rejecting Stevens' advocacy for a compromise.

In the end, Congress passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980, a compromise that set aside millions of acres for national parks, wildlife refuges and other protected areas. It was one of the last bills Carter signed before leaving office.

Gravel's Senate tenure also was notable for his anti-war activity. In 1971, he led a one-man filibuster to protest the Vietnam-era draft and he read into the Congressional Record 4,100 pages of the 7,000-page leaked document known as the Pentagon Papers, the Defense Department's history of the country's early involvement in Vietnam.

Gravel reentered national politics decades after his time in the Senate to twice run for president. Gravel, then 75, and his wife, Whitney, took public transportation in 2006 to announce he was running for president as a Democrat in the 2008 election ultimately won by Obama.

He launched his quest for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination as a critic of the Iraq war.

"I believe America is doing harm every day our troops remain in Iraq — harm to ourselves and to the prospects for peace in the world," Gravel said in 2006. He hitched his campaign to an effort that would give all policy decisions to the people through a direct vote, including health care reform and declarations of war.

Gravel garnered attention for his fiery comments at Democratic forums.

In one 2007 debate, the issue of the possibility of using nuclear weapons against Iran came up, and Gravel confronted then-Sen. Obama. "Tell me, Barack, who do you want to nuke?" Gravel said. Obama replied: "I'm not planning to nuke anybody right now, Mike."

Gravel then ran as a Libertarian candidate after he was excluded from later Democratic debates.

In an email to supporters, he said the Democratic Party "no longer represents my vision for our great country." "It is a party that continues to sustain war, the military-industrial complex and imperialism — all of which I find anathema to my views," he said.

He failed to get the Libertarian nomination.

Gravel briefly ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020. He again criticized American wars and vowed to slash military spending. His last campaign was notable in that both his campaign manager and chief of staff were just 18 at the time of his short-lived candidacy.

"There was never any ... plan that he would do anything more than participate in the debates. He didn't plan to campaign, but he wanted to get his ideas before a larger audience," Johnson said.

Gravel failed to qualify for the debates. He endorsed Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the contest eventually won by now-President Joe Biden.

Gravel was born Maurice Robert Gravel in Springfield, Massachusetts, on May 13, 1930.

In Alaska, he served as a state representative, including a stint as House speaker, in the mid-1960s.

He won his first Senate term after defeating incumbent Sen. Ernest Gruening, a former territorial governor, in the 1968 Democratic primary.

Gravel served two terms until he was defeated in the 1980 Democratic primary by Gruening's grandson, Clark Gruening, who lost the election to Republican Frank Murkowski.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

According to one new account of the Trump presidency, even telling the story of President Trump's Covid diagnosis was difficult due to the chaos in the white house. Here, Trump removes his protective mask after being discharged from the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center with Covid-19.; Credit: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

When the Wall Street Journal's Michael Bender wrote his book about Donald Trump's 2020 defeat, one section stuck out as particularly difficult: telling the story of what Bender dubbed "Hell Week-And-A-Half."​

"It was the ten days in 2020 that started with the super spreader event in the Rose Garden, included the Trump's disastrous debate with Joe Biden in Cleveland, and then Trump himself obviously testing positive for COVID a few days later," Bender said.

It's not just that it was a lot to fold together; it's that simply figuring out what happened was maddening.​

"How early he tested positive, how sick he was during that time — I mean, these are serious questions with national security implications that very few people knew or had firsthand knowledge of, and I had competing versions from senior officials, serious people who all were telling me different versions of that story," he said.

Bender's Frankly, We Did Win This Election is one of many books trying to pull order from Trump's chaos, and that struggle to discern the truth, he explains, is itself emblematic of the Trump administration.​

"The deception wasn't just with the public. It was literally from person to person inside the West Wing," he said. "And that's the story — not necessarily worrying about exactly what happened, which will have to come out at some later point, if it ever does."

Former officials are judging Trump's election lies and pandemic response poorly

Judging from the excerpts that have been released, this first wave of post-Trump-presidency books is filled with behind-closed-doors details — like, for example, how gravely ill Trump was with COVID-19, or former Attorney General William Barr's blunt assessment about Trump's claims of a rigged election: "​My suspicion all the way along was that there was nothing there. That it was all bulls***," as ABC's Jonathan Karl recounts.

But the challenge of recounting this chapter of American history is not just about recounting news-making moments — the racist statements, the allegations of sexual assault, the impeachments — but making sense of it.​

Yasmeen Abutaleb, who coauthored the forthcoming Nightmare Scenario with her Washington Post colleague Damian Paletta, agreed that it was hard to discern the truth from dozens of conflicting stories from within the White House.

But that made it all the more striking when they did find consensus on the Trump White House's coronavirus response. "Of the more than 180 people we spoke to, there wasn't a single one who defended the collective response," she said.

Writing this book, she added, allowed her and Paletta to come away with a clearer assessment of the Trump White House's pandemic response than they gleaned from their day-to-day coverage last year.

"Coronavirus was going to be a challenge no matter who was in charge," she said. "But when we looked at the number of opportunities there were to turn the response around, many of which we didn't know about at the time or couldn't learn it at the time, I think we were shocked at the number of opportunities there were and how they weren't taken."

In addition to the challenge of telling complete, ordered stories of a chaotic presidency, there is also the challenge of placing that presidency into historical context, says Princeton presidential historian Julian Zelizer. He's working with a team of historians to pull together a history of the Trump administration.

"Why did America's political system have room for so much chaos over a four year period? Which is this big puzzle I don't think everyone's totally grappled with," he said.

It's not just journalists and historians. Trump-administration insiders will try to explain their place in history. That's according to Keith Urbahn, a co-founder of Javelin, a literary agency that represented Bender, former UN ambassador John Bolton, and former FBI director James Comey, with more to come.​

"I think it does require for people who worked in the Trump presidency to wrestle with some of the moral compromises that they had to make by serving in that administration," he said.

Post-Trump chaos is rippling through the publishing world

Writing the history of a leaky, live-tweeted presidency has been unusual for a variety of additional reasons. There's book industry tumult — Simon and Schuster employees protested the publishing giant over printing former Vice President Mike Pence's book.

In addition, Trump could still run for president again, which may be why he has given at least 22 book interviews, Axios recently reported. (He has also said he is writing the "book of all books," though some major publishers are hesitant about publishing it, Politico has reported.)

The Trump era was also unusual for the book industry in another way.

"We can honestly say that the four years of the Trump administration were four of the strongest years cumulatively for political books since we've been tracking books, which started in 2001," said Kristen McLean, executive director and industry analyst at market research firm NPD.

Now, however, those sales moving back towards a pre-Trump normal — political book sales are down 60% from the second half of 2020, McLean said.

But that doesn't mean interest will disappear, according to Javelin co-founder Matt Latimer.​

"For example, next year there are a dozen or more books coming out about President Nixon," he said. "I mean, I think long after we're all gone, people are going to be trying to figure out what the hell this was all about."

It's been 47 years since Nixon resigned. By that same math, we'll be reading new Trump books into the late 2060s — and probably beyond.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.