Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
January 8, 2022
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/america-electoral-map-turning-democratic-by-james-k-galbraith-2022-01
AUSTIN – With the anniversary of the January 6 riot now over, let’s focus on the big picture. The great anomaly of the 2020 US presidential election was that Joe Biden won the national popular vote by seven million votes, yet came within 43,000 (in three close states) of losing the Electoral College, and thus the election. In California alone, Biden had five million more votes than he needed, and in New York, another two million. So far this century, only Barack Obama has won decisive victories in both the popular vote and the Electoral College. In 2000 and 2016, the popular-vote winner lost the election. In 2004, the result turned on a single state: Ohio. This anomaly is not only persistent but constitutional, which makes it practically unsolvable.
Nevertheless, the 2020 election was a triumph for democracy. Turnout, as a proportion of eligible voters, was higher than in any election since 1900 (when the franchise was limited to males, almost all white). The COVID-19 pandemic forced local election administrators to innovate, and they did so with expanded voting by mail, early-voting days, 24-hour voting, and drive-in voting. More than 100 million ballots were cast before Election Day. In the end, Donald Trump’s final count was 11 million higher than it was in 2016, and Biden’s exceeded Hillary Clinton’s 2016 total by 15 million.
Low turnout in America is usually blamed on voter apathy, but 2020 proved that the real problem has always been barriers to voting. In previous elections, polling places were scarce, the ballots long and complex, and the whole process a slow one, with queues often stretching for hours. Many people lack the time, the patience, or the physical stamina to wait. The system also discouraged any change in voting patterns, because local election boards allocated machines and poll workers according to past turnout. So there were never enough machines for new voters whenever turnout surged, anywhere at all, for any reason. The 2020 election was thus a great unintended experiment in blowing up the barriers to voting – and it worked.
Those now crying fraud cite the vast increase in turnout as evidence. In fact, the growth in turnout in so-called swing states was no greater than in states where the outcome was not in question. One exception was Arizona, where turnout grew by 30%. But once you adjust for Arizona’s rapid population growth, the proportionate increase is similar to California, where turnout fraud would have been pointless. In any event, the Arizona vote was administered by Republican officials. Nor do the vote counts look suspicious. Votes are recorded and reported by county, and not merely at the state level. Any tampering with vote counts would have had to happen in specific counties. And because the 2020 election had a close precedent in 2016, strange changes in county voting patterns should be easy to spot.
snip
James K. Galbraith - America's Democratic Future
Notwithstanding the lasting shock of the January 6, 2021, attack of the US Capitol, the Democratic Party can take comfort in the broader demographic trends. Not only was the 2020 presidential election an administrative triumph; record-high turnout showed that the real problem has always been barriers to voting.https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/america-electoral-map-turning-democratic-by-james-k-galbraith-2022-01
AUSTIN – With the anniversary of the January 6 riot now over, let’s focus on the big picture. The great anomaly of the 2020 US presidential election was that Joe Biden won the national popular vote by seven million votes, yet came within 43,000 (in three close states) of losing the Electoral College, and thus the election. In California alone, Biden had five million more votes than he needed, and in New York, another two million. So far this century, only Barack Obama has won decisive victories in both the popular vote and the Electoral College. In 2000 and 2016, the popular-vote winner lost the election. In 2004, the result turned on a single state: Ohio. This anomaly is not only persistent but constitutional, which makes it practically unsolvable.
Nevertheless, the 2020 election was a triumph for democracy. Turnout, as a proportion of eligible voters, was higher than in any election since 1900 (when the franchise was limited to males, almost all white). The COVID-19 pandemic forced local election administrators to innovate, and they did so with expanded voting by mail, early-voting days, 24-hour voting, and drive-in voting. More than 100 million ballots were cast before Election Day. In the end, Donald Trump’s final count was 11 million higher than it was in 2016, and Biden’s exceeded Hillary Clinton’s 2016 total by 15 million.
Low turnout in America is usually blamed on voter apathy, but 2020 proved that the real problem has always been barriers to voting. In previous elections, polling places were scarce, the ballots long and complex, and the whole process a slow one, with queues often stretching for hours. Many people lack the time, the patience, or the physical stamina to wait. The system also discouraged any change in voting patterns, because local election boards allocated machines and poll workers according to past turnout. So there were never enough machines for new voters whenever turnout surged, anywhere at all, for any reason. The 2020 election was thus a great unintended experiment in blowing up the barriers to voting – and it worked.
Those now crying fraud cite the vast increase in turnout as evidence. In fact, the growth in turnout in so-called swing states was no greater than in states where the outcome was not in question. One exception was Arizona, where turnout grew by 30%. But once you adjust for Arizona’s rapid population growth, the proportionate increase is similar to California, where turnout fraud would have been pointless. In any event, the Arizona vote was administered by Republican officials. Nor do the vote counts look suspicious. Votes are recorded and reported by county, and not merely at the state level. Any tampering with vote counts would have had to happen in specific counties. And because the 2020 election had a close precedent in 2016, strange changes in county voting patterns should be easy to spot.
snip
January 8, 2022
https://archive.fo/gySAX
The good news from the jobs report released on Friday morning was that the unemployment rate dropped to 3.9 percent. As you may know, this is measured with a different survey than the one that tallies how many workers are employed, meaning that, at times, there can be a disconnection between the two figures. That was the case on Friday: Economists predicted that more jobs would be added, meaning that the numbers were lower than expected, but the decline in the unemployment rate was good news.
But there’s an important caveat to that unemployment rate number. It is calculated by figuring out how many of those who are working or looking for work don’t have jobs. But that means that if more people simply drop out of the labor force — that is, they aren’t looking for work — the unemployment rate can go down even without more people getting jobs.
A simple example is useful. Imagine 100 people, 80 of whom are working and 10 of whom are looking for work. The other 10 aren’t in the labor force. For this group, the unemployment rate is 11.1 percent — 10 out of the 90 people in the labor force aren’t working. Now imagine that five of those who are working and five of those who were looking drop out of the labor force, say, through retirement. Now there are five people unemployed out of 80 people in the labor force, so the unemployment rate drops to 6.3 percent, even though the number of people working has gone down from 90 to 85 of 100.
That’s not exactly what’s happening here. The labor force participation rate (the percentage of a population that’s working or looking for work) remained the same from November to December. But the participation rate in December was 1.5 percentage points lower than February 2020, meaning that there are fewer people in the labor pool and, therefore, meaning that the same number of unemployed people would lead to a lower unemployment rate. As you might expect, participation rates vary depending on age. Older Americans are more likely to have retired, so a lower percentage of that group is in the labor force at any given time. In recent years, the participation rate among those 55 and over has been fairly flat as the rate among those aged 25 to 54 has increased. (The graph below uses figures for January of each year, meaning that the value for 2020 excludes the effects of the pandemic.)
snip
The economy is feeling the effects of the fading baby boom
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/07/economy-is-feeling-effects-fading-baby-boom/https://archive.fo/gySAX
The good news from the jobs report released on Friday morning was that the unemployment rate dropped to 3.9 percent. As you may know, this is measured with a different survey than the one that tallies how many workers are employed, meaning that, at times, there can be a disconnection between the two figures. That was the case on Friday: Economists predicted that more jobs would be added, meaning that the numbers were lower than expected, but the decline in the unemployment rate was good news.
But there’s an important caveat to that unemployment rate number. It is calculated by figuring out how many of those who are working or looking for work don’t have jobs. But that means that if more people simply drop out of the labor force — that is, they aren’t looking for work — the unemployment rate can go down even without more people getting jobs.
A simple example is useful. Imagine 100 people, 80 of whom are working and 10 of whom are looking for work. The other 10 aren’t in the labor force. For this group, the unemployment rate is 11.1 percent — 10 out of the 90 people in the labor force aren’t working. Now imagine that five of those who are working and five of those who were looking drop out of the labor force, say, through retirement. Now there are five people unemployed out of 80 people in the labor force, so the unemployment rate drops to 6.3 percent, even though the number of people working has gone down from 90 to 85 of 100.
That’s not exactly what’s happening here. The labor force participation rate (the percentage of a population that’s working or looking for work) remained the same from November to December. But the participation rate in December was 1.5 percentage points lower than February 2020, meaning that there are fewer people in the labor pool and, therefore, meaning that the same number of unemployed people would lead to a lower unemployment rate. As you might expect, participation rates vary depending on age. Older Americans are more likely to have retired, so a lower percentage of that group is in the labor force at any given time. In recent years, the participation rate among those 55 and over has been fairly flat as the rate among those aged 25 to 54 has increased. (The graph below uses figures for January of each year, meaning that the value for 2020 excludes the effects of the pandemic.)
snip
January 8, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/08/us/teachers-unions-covid-schools.html
Few American cities have labor politics as fraught as Chicago’s, where the nation’s third-largest school system shut down this week after the teachers’ union members refused to work in person, arguing that classrooms were unsafe amid the Omicron surge. But in a number of other places, the tenuous labor peace that has allowed most schools to operate normally this year is in danger of collapsing.
While not yet threatening to walk off the job, unions are back at negotiating tables, pushing in some cases for a return to remote learning. They frequently cite understaffing because of illness, and shortages of rapid tests and medical-grade masks. Some teachers, in a rear-guard action, have staged sick outs.
In Milwaukee, schools are remote until Jan. 18, because of staffing issues. But the teachers’ union president, Amy Mizialko, doubted that the situation would significantly improve and worried that the school board would resist extending online classes. “I anticipate it’ll be a fight,” Ms. Mizialko said. She credited the district for at least delaying in-person schooling to start the year but criticized Democratic officials for placing unrealistic pressure on teachers and schools.
“I think that Joe Biden and Miguel Cardona and the newly elected mayor of New York City and Lori Lightfoot — they can all declare that schools will be open,” Ms. Mizialko added, referring to the U.S. education secretary and the mayor of Chicago. “But unless they have hundreds of thousands of people to step in for educators who are sick in this uncontrolled surge, they won’t be.”
snip
As Teachers' Unions Push for Remote Schooling Again, Parents Worry. So Do Democrats.
Chicago teachers have voted to go remote. Other unions are agitating for change. For Democrats, who promised to keep schools open, the tensions are a distinctly unwelcome development.https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/08/us/teachers-unions-covid-schools.html
Few American cities have labor politics as fraught as Chicago’s, where the nation’s third-largest school system shut down this week after the teachers’ union members refused to work in person, arguing that classrooms were unsafe amid the Omicron surge. But in a number of other places, the tenuous labor peace that has allowed most schools to operate normally this year is in danger of collapsing.
While not yet threatening to walk off the job, unions are back at negotiating tables, pushing in some cases for a return to remote learning. They frequently cite understaffing because of illness, and shortages of rapid tests and medical-grade masks. Some teachers, in a rear-guard action, have staged sick outs.
In Milwaukee, schools are remote until Jan. 18, because of staffing issues. But the teachers’ union president, Amy Mizialko, doubted that the situation would significantly improve and worried that the school board would resist extending online classes. “I anticipate it’ll be a fight,” Ms. Mizialko said. She credited the district for at least delaying in-person schooling to start the year but criticized Democratic officials for placing unrealistic pressure on teachers and schools.
“I think that Joe Biden and Miguel Cardona and the newly elected mayor of New York City and Lori Lightfoot — they can all declare that schools will be open,” Ms. Mizialko added, referring to the U.S. education secretary and the mayor of Chicago. “But unless they have hundreds of thousands of people to step in for educators who are sick in this uncontrolled surge, they won’t be.”
snip
January 8, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/07/nyregion/eric-adams-mayor-nyc.html
Saturday marks the end of Eric Adams’s first week as the mayor of New York, a time he has used to successfully distinguish himself from his predecessor — taking the J train; holding meetings at 9 a.m., an hour that found Bill de Blasio still in sweatpants; riding a Citi Bike in a suit, horse-bit loafers and a rose-colored helmet coordinated to the hue of his tie. Whatever might come, this would not be a tenure of earth tones and lethargy and saturnine expressions.
That message was already clear two months ago when Mr. Adams appeared on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” and stopped the host when he mentioned the mayor elect had gone to Zero Bond, a private club downtown, on the night he won. Correcting the record, he pointed out that he made it to three clubs that evening — not just one — having also hit Cipriani and Sugar Hill in Brooklyn. “I am the mayor; this is a city of nightlife. I must test the product,” he said, easily getting the laughs that eluded Mr. de Blasio for eight years.
“We used to be the coolest place on the globe,” he lamented. “We’re so damned boring now, man.” Would he funnel us back through the space-time continuum to Fun City? Partying would have its limits as Mr. Adams explained, invoking a favorite trope of his, that while he may go out at night with the boys, he wakes up in the morning “with the men.”
By all accounts, Mr. Adams’ work-to-play ratio skews almost entirely toward the heavy lift of bureaucracy, but it has been a long time since the city has had a mayor invested in such calculatedly masculine posturing — an image carved out of self-assurance, absent the typically softening reliance on family narrative. (Mr. Adams did say on Thursday that he was getting a dog; on the other hand, he will be looking for a German shepherd.)
snip
Is New York Ready for the Mayor of Swagger?
Eric Adams begins his term selling us on style — the alpha public servant, efficient and full of brash confidence.https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/07/nyregion/eric-adams-mayor-nyc.html
Saturday marks the end of Eric Adams’s first week as the mayor of New York, a time he has used to successfully distinguish himself from his predecessor — taking the J train; holding meetings at 9 a.m., an hour that found Bill de Blasio still in sweatpants; riding a Citi Bike in a suit, horse-bit loafers and a rose-colored helmet coordinated to the hue of his tie. Whatever might come, this would not be a tenure of earth tones and lethargy and saturnine expressions.
That message was already clear two months ago when Mr. Adams appeared on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” and stopped the host when he mentioned the mayor elect had gone to Zero Bond, a private club downtown, on the night he won. Correcting the record, he pointed out that he made it to three clubs that evening — not just one — having also hit Cipriani and Sugar Hill in Brooklyn. “I am the mayor; this is a city of nightlife. I must test the product,” he said, easily getting the laughs that eluded Mr. de Blasio for eight years.
“We used to be the coolest place on the globe,” he lamented. “We’re so damned boring now, man.” Would he funnel us back through the space-time continuum to Fun City? Partying would have its limits as Mr. Adams explained, invoking a favorite trope of his, that while he may go out at night with the boys, he wakes up in the morning “with the men.”
By all accounts, Mr. Adams’ work-to-play ratio skews almost entirely toward the heavy lift of bureaucracy, but it has been a long time since the city has had a mayor invested in such calculatedly masculine posturing — an image carved out of self-assurance, absent the typically softening reliance on family narrative. (Mr. Adams did say on Thursday that he was getting a dog; on the other hand, he will be looking for a German shepherd.)
snip
January 8, 2022
If you’re confused by the CDC’s new isolation guidelines, you’re not the only one.
https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/01/americas-covid-rules-are-dumpster-fire/360518/
On Tuesday, the CDC officially dropped the detailed, 1,800-word version of its new isolation guidance for people who have been infected by the coronavirus. So far, the best way I’ve got to sum it up is this: Hunker down for five days instead of the typical 10, then do what you want. Okay, sorry, that’s overly simplistic. Here’s the slightly longer version: You can leave isolation after five days, without a negative test, if you’re not severely sick; you’re not immunocompromised; you’re not in a correctional facility, in a homeless shelter, or on a cruise ship; and you feel that your symptoms are mostly gone, if you had any at all.
Sorry, sorry. There’s actually more. If you do leave isolation after day five, the CDC would like you to, please, until you’re past day 10, still wear a mask everywhere you go, and not eat inside of restaurants, and not mingle with high-risk people, and not travel. Okay, fine, you may travel if you must; just don’t forget that mask. You can test out of isolation, by the way, if you like. First, though, you have to find a test—make sure it’s a rapid antigen test—and take it “towards the end” of your five-day isolation. Just please, still wear that mask until day 10, though remember that negative results can’t rule out infection, and that antigen tests tend to perform best when they’re taken repeatedly over a couple of days, and also, you don’t technically have to test at all.
If you’re overwhelmed, you’re not the only one. In the week and a half since the CDC said that it was planning to update its isolation guidance, I’ve heard almost exclusively harsh reactions from experts, who have criticized the recommendations as convoluted, wishy-washy, and even unscientific. The guidance reads like a nightmarish choose-your-own-adventure book, they’ve told me. It lacks crucial caveats, can’t seem to make up its mind on the role of testing, and asks people to do so, so much before they can get back to daily life. “It’s a hot mess,” one researcher told me. “Unnecessarily confusing,” someone else decreed. “Of all the communication stumbles since February 2020, this one ranks in the top three,” another said.
Such a mess has, unfortunately, become par for the course in the CDC’s handling of the pandemic. The agency is yet again punting the responsibility of infection control to the masses; allowing people’s fates to splinter by timing, by testing, by … whatever, is hardly good incentive for the public to read the instructions, much less follow them to a T. At a time when Omicron cases are already shattering records nationwide, the costs of muddled messaging are extraordinarily high. I asked Alison Buttenheim, who studies the intersection of vaccines and human behavior at the University of Pennsylvania, if she thought people would just give up on trying to parse the guidelines and simply improvise their own end-of-isolation rules. “I think people already have,” she said.
snip
The American Medical Association: CDC quarantine and isolation guidance is confusing, counterproductive
https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-cdc-quarantine-and-isolation-guidance-confusing-counterproductive
“Nearly two years into this pandemic, with Omicron cases surging across the country, the American people should be able to count on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for timely, accurate, clear guidance to protect themselves, their loved ones, and their communities. Instead, the new recommendations on quarantine and isolation are not only confusing, but are risking further spread of the virus.
“Living during a pandemic is challenging, and what we learn along the way—and data we collect—will necessarily change our course of action at times. According to the CDC’s own rationale for shortened isolation periods for the general public, an estimated 31 percent of people remain infectious 5 days after a positive COVID-19 test.
With hundreds of thousands of new cases daily and more than a million positive reported cases on January 3, tens of thousands—potentially hundreds of thousands of people—could return to work and school infectious if they follow the CDC’s new guidance on ending isolation after five days without a negative test. Physicians are concerned that these recommendations put our patients at risk and could further overwhelm our health care system.
“A negative test should be required for ending isolation after one tests positive for COVID-19. Reemerging without knowing one’s status unnecessarily risks further transmission of the virus. “Test availability remains a challenge in many parts of the country, including in hospitals, and we urge the administration to pull all available levers to ramp up production and distribution of tests. But a dearth of tests at the moment does not justify omitting a testing requirement to exit a now shortened isolation.”
snip
America's COVID Rules Are a Dumpster Fire
If you’re confused by the CDC’s new isolation guidelines, you’re not the only one.
https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/01/americas-covid-rules-are-dumpster-fire/360518/
On Tuesday, the CDC officially dropped the detailed, 1,800-word version of its new isolation guidance for people who have been infected by the coronavirus. So far, the best way I’ve got to sum it up is this: Hunker down for five days instead of the typical 10, then do what you want. Okay, sorry, that’s overly simplistic. Here’s the slightly longer version: You can leave isolation after five days, without a negative test, if you’re not severely sick; you’re not immunocompromised; you’re not in a correctional facility, in a homeless shelter, or on a cruise ship; and you feel that your symptoms are mostly gone, if you had any at all.
Sorry, sorry. There’s actually more. If you do leave isolation after day five, the CDC would like you to, please, until you’re past day 10, still wear a mask everywhere you go, and not eat inside of restaurants, and not mingle with high-risk people, and not travel. Okay, fine, you may travel if you must; just don’t forget that mask. You can test out of isolation, by the way, if you like. First, though, you have to find a test—make sure it’s a rapid antigen test—and take it “towards the end” of your five-day isolation. Just please, still wear that mask until day 10, though remember that negative results can’t rule out infection, and that antigen tests tend to perform best when they’re taken repeatedly over a couple of days, and also, you don’t technically have to test at all.
If you’re overwhelmed, you’re not the only one. In the week and a half since the CDC said that it was planning to update its isolation guidance, I’ve heard almost exclusively harsh reactions from experts, who have criticized the recommendations as convoluted, wishy-washy, and even unscientific. The guidance reads like a nightmarish choose-your-own-adventure book, they’ve told me. It lacks crucial caveats, can’t seem to make up its mind on the role of testing, and asks people to do so, so much before they can get back to daily life. “It’s a hot mess,” one researcher told me. “Unnecessarily confusing,” someone else decreed. “Of all the communication stumbles since February 2020, this one ranks in the top three,” another said.
Such a mess has, unfortunately, become par for the course in the CDC’s handling of the pandemic. The agency is yet again punting the responsibility of infection control to the masses; allowing people’s fates to splinter by timing, by testing, by … whatever, is hardly good incentive for the public to read the instructions, much less follow them to a T. At a time when Omicron cases are already shattering records nationwide, the costs of muddled messaging are extraordinarily high. I asked Alison Buttenheim, who studies the intersection of vaccines and human behavior at the University of Pennsylvania, if she thought people would just give up on trying to parse the guidelines and simply improvise their own end-of-isolation rules. “I think people already have,” she said.
snip
The American Medical Association: CDC quarantine and isolation guidance is confusing, counterproductive
https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-cdc-quarantine-and-isolation-guidance-confusing-counterproductive
“Nearly two years into this pandemic, with Omicron cases surging across the country, the American people should be able to count on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for timely, accurate, clear guidance to protect themselves, their loved ones, and their communities. Instead, the new recommendations on quarantine and isolation are not only confusing, but are risking further spread of the virus.
“Living during a pandemic is challenging, and what we learn along the way—and data we collect—will necessarily change our course of action at times. According to the CDC’s own rationale for shortened isolation periods for the general public, an estimated 31 percent of people remain infectious 5 days after a positive COVID-19 test.
With hundreds of thousands of new cases daily and more than a million positive reported cases on January 3, tens of thousands—potentially hundreds of thousands of people—could return to work and school infectious if they follow the CDC’s new guidance on ending isolation after five days without a negative test. Physicians are concerned that these recommendations put our patients at risk and could further overwhelm our health care system.
“A negative test should be required for ending isolation after one tests positive for COVID-19. Reemerging without knowing one’s status unnecessarily risks further transmission of the virus. “Test availability remains a challenge in many parts of the country, including in hospitals, and we urge the administration to pull all available levers to ramp up production and distribution of tests. But a dearth of tests at the moment does not justify omitting a testing requirement to exit a now shortened isolation.”
snip
January 8, 2022
Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims, 27, from Petersfield, Hampshire, was told by a doctor her hormones were to blame and her aggressive cancer went undiagnosed for months
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/aspiring-model-27-dies-aggressive-25871758
An aspiring young model died of cervical cancer at the age of 27 just months after being told by a doctor that her hormones were simply to blame for her "myriad" of symptoms, an inquest heard. Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims had an "aggressive" form of the disease which had gone undiagnosed for months despite continual complaints of abdominal pain and bleeding.
The graduate passed away in hospital just a day after the cancer was discovered, having previously been told by the consultant that she didn't need to be physically examined and her problems could be linked to ceasing birth control.
Only weeks before her death - as Britain entered the first coronavirus lockdown - she was prescribed antibiotics over the phone for her condition, the hearing was told.
She was seen by a doctor face by face only after the GP thought her shortness of breath meant she had Covid. Her case has led a coroner to suggest national guidelines, which say women suspected of having the disease need to wait two weeks before being seen by a specialist, may have contributed to her death.
snip
27 Year-old woman died one day after cancer diagnosis, symptoms dismissed as 'hormonal'
Aspiring model, 27, dies from 'aggressive' cervical cancer one day after being diagnosedPorsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims, 27, from Petersfield, Hampshire, was told by a doctor her hormones were to blame and her aggressive cancer went undiagnosed for months
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/aspiring-model-27-dies-aggressive-25871758
An aspiring young model died of cervical cancer at the age of 27 just months after being told by a doctor that her hormones were simply to blame for her "myriad" of symptoms, an inquest heard. Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims had an "aggressive" form of the disease which had gone undiagnosed for months despite continual complaints of abdominal pain and bleeding.
The graduate passed away in hospital just a day after the cancer was discovered, having previously been told by the consultant that she didn't need to be physically examined and her problems could be linked to ceasing birth control.
Only weeks before her death - as Britain entered the first coronavirus lockdown - she was prescribed antibiotics over the phone for her condition, the hearing was told.
She was seen by a doctor face by face only after the GP thought her shortness of breath meant she had Covid. Her case has led a coroner to suggest national guidelines, which say women suspected of having the disease need to wait two weeks before being seen by a specialist, may have contributed to her death.
snip
January 7, 2022
In "The Tribes of Tatooine," Boba Fett finds kinship and purpose with the Tuskens as the Hutts threaten his claim on Mos Espa in the present.
https://collider.com/book-of-boba-fett-episode-2-review-temuera-morrison-ming-na-wen-disney-plus/
Following a more subdued premiere, The Book of Boba Fett’s “Chapter 2: The Tribes of Tatooine,” delivered one of the best and most thematically rich episodes of Star Wars television to date. The episode opens on Boba Fett (Temuera Morrison) and Fennec Shand (Ming-Na Wen) interrogating their new prisoner—a member of the Order of the Night Wind. Under the fear of being eaten by a Rancor that no longer exists, the assassin reveals that he was sent by the Mayor, which leads Boba and Fennec on a bit of a wild goose chase.
The duo head into Mos Espa to get an audience with the Mayor, much to the chagrin of his Majordomo (David Pasquesi). Moz Shaiz (voiced by Robert Rodriguez) has the assassin killed and pays Boba off like he’s hauled in a bounty, which—perhaps to the surprise of fans—prompts Boba to announce that he isn’t a bounty hunter. At least, not anymore. Moz Shaiz offers Boba some sage advice about ruling before sending them on their way to question Garsa Fwip (Jennifer Beals) about the assassin. At the Sanctuary, conversations about assassins are quickly forgotten when Fwip reveals that Jabba the Hutt’s cousins have come to Tatooine to lay claim to their cousin’s palace. But this wasn’t a tease for a later episode. Beyond the Sanctuary, drums are heard, heralding the arrival of the twin Hutts.
All of this takes place over the course of the first 14 minutes of a whopping 50-minute episode—clocking it in as one of the longest episodes of Star Wars television to date. From there, the remainder of the episode is focused on Boba Fett’s time with the Tuskens and his evolution as a person. It lays the groundwork for who he is as a leader in the present: someone willing to find a way to work together, rather than attacking when first provoked. Without his armor or his ship, Boba Fett is forced to be reborn as a new person in the most literal sense of the phrase.
For the majority of Boba Fett’s canon existence, he has been cast as a ruthless, bloodthirsty, and violent bounty hunter who is willing to do whatever his employer requests. George Lucas’ prequel era films and the subsequent Clone Wars animated series made strides to remind audiences that he was once a little boy who lost his father, but it wasn’t until The Book of Boba Fett (and by extension, his reintroduction in The Mandalorian) that this has become thematically important for who he is as a character.
snip
Amazingly Better than Episode 1- 'The Book of Boba Fett' Episode 2 (spoilers)
Delivers One of the Most Thematically Rich Stories to DateIn "The Tribes of Tatooine," Boba Fett finds kinship and purpose with the Tuskens as the Hutts threaten his claim on Mos Espa in the present.
https://collider.com/book-of-boba-fett-episode-2-review-temuera-morrison-ming-na-wen-disney-plus/
Following a more subdued premiere, The Book of Boba Fett’s “Chapter 2: The Tribes of Tatooine,” delivered one of the best and most thematically rich episodes of Star Wars television to date. The episode opens on Boba Fett (Temuera Morrison) and Fennec Shand (Ming-Na Wen) interrogating their new prisoner—a member of the Order of the Night Wind. Under the fear of being eaten by a Rancor that no longer exists, the assassin reveals that he was sent by the Mayor, which leads Boba and Fennec on a bit of a wild goose chase.
The duo head into Mos Espa to get an audience with the Mayor, much to the chagrin of his Majordomo (David Pasquesi). Moz Shaiz (voiced by Robert Rodriguez) has the assassin killed and pays Boba off like he’s hauled in a bounty, which—perhaps to the surprise of fans—prompts Boba to announce that he isn’t a bounty hunter. At least, not anymore. Moz Shaiz offers Boba some sage advice about ruling before sending them on their way to question Garsa Fwip (Jennifer Beals) about the assassin. At the Sanctuary, conversations about assassins are quickly forgotten when Fwip reveals that Jabba the Hutt’s cousins have come to Tatooine to lay claim to their cousin’s palace. But this wasn’t a tease for a later episode. Beyond the Sanctuary, drums are heard, heralding the arrival of the twin Hutts.
All of this takes place over the course of the first 14 minutes of a whopping 50-minute episode—clocking it in as one of the longest episodes of Star Wars television to date. From there, the remainder of the episode is focused on Boba Fett’s time with the Tuskens and his evolution as a person. It lays the groundwork for who he is as a leader in the present: someone willing to find a way to work together, rather than attacking when first provoked. Without his armor or his ship, Boba Fett is forced to be reborn as a new person in the most literal sense of the phrase.
For the majority of Boba Fett’s canon existence, he has been cast as a ruthless, bloodthirsty, and violent bounty hunter who is willing to do whatever his employer requests. George Lucas’ prequel era films and the subsequent Clone Wars animated series made strides to remind audiences that he was once a little boy who lost his father, but it wasn’t until The Book of Boba Fett (and by extension, his reintroduction in The Mandalorian) that this has become thematically important for who he is as a character.
snip
January 7, 2022
Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims, 27, from Petersfield, Hampshire, was told by a doctor her hormones were to blame and her aggressive cancer went undiagnosed for months
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/aspiring-model-27-dies-aggressive-25871758
An aspiring young model died of cervical cancer at the age of 27 just months after being told by a doctor that her hormones were simply to blame for her "myriad" of symptoms, an inquest heard. Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims had an "aggressive" form of the disease which had gone undiagnosed for months despite continual complaints of abdominal pain and bleeding.
The graduate passed away in hospital just a day after the cancer was discovered, having previously been told by the consultant that she didn't need to be physically examined and her problems could be linked to ceasing birth control.
Only weeks before her death - as Britain entered the first coronavirus lockdown - she was prescribed antibiotics over the phone for her condition, the hearing was told.
She was seen by a doctor face by face only after the GP thought her shortness of breath meant she had Covid. Her case has led a coroner to suggest national guidelines, which say women suspected of having the disease need to wait two weeks before being seen by a specialist, may have contributed to her death.
snip
27 Year-old woman died one day after cancer diagnosis, symptoms dismissed as 'hormonal'
Aspiring model, 27, dies from 'aggressive' cervical cancer one day after being diagnosedPorsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims, 27, from Petersfield, Hampshire, was told by a doctor her hormones were to blame and her aggressive cancer went undiagnosed for months
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/aspiring-model-27-dies-aggressive-25871758
An aspiring young model died of cervical cancer at the age of 27 just months after being told by a doctor that her hormones were simply to blame for her "myriad" of symptoms, an inquest heard. Porsche 'Pops' McGregor-Sims had an "aggressive" form of the disease which had gone undiagnosed for months despite continual complaints of abdominal pain and bleeding.
The graduate passed away in hospital just a day after the cancer was discovered, having previously been told by the consultant that she didn't need to be physically examined and her problems could be linked to ceasing birth control.
Only weeks before her death - as Britain entered the first coronavirus lockdown - she was prescribed antibiotics over the phone for her condition, the hearing was told.
She was seen by a doctor face by face only after the GP thought her shortness of breath meant she had Covid. Her case has led a coroner to suggest national guidelines, which say women suspected of having the disease need to wait two weeks before being seen by a specialist, may have contributed to her death.
snip
January 7, 2022
Srdjan Djokovic: Jesus was crucified on cross, now Novak is being crucified
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tennis/novak-djokovic-visa-jesus-dad-25875995
Novak Djokovic compared to Jesus, Spartacus, after being detained in Australia over vaccine dispute
Srdjan Djokovic: Jesus was crucified on cross, now Novak is being crucified
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tennis/novak-djokovic-visa-jesus-dad-25875995
Djokovic will be forced to spend Orthodox Christmas today alone in the hotel. His father Srdjan claimed he was being “held captive” and added: “Jesus was crucified on the cross but he is still alive among us. They are trying to crucify and belittle Novak and throw him to his knees.
"This has nothing to do with sports, this is a political agenda. Novak is the best player and the best athlete in the world, but several hundred million people from the West can't stomach that.”
"This has nothing to do with sports, this is a political agenda. Novak is the best player and the best athlete in the world, but several hundred million people from the West can't stomach that.”
Srdjan Djokovic also described the six-time Wimbledon champion as "the Spartacus of the new world that doesn't tolerate injustice, colonialism and hypocrisy” and “the leader of the free world”. His mother Dijana called Djokovic a “sacrificial lamb” and a “revolutionary who is changing the world”.
Djordje Djokovic also read out a message from his brother Novak Djokovic saying: “God sees everything. Morals and ethics as the greatest ideals are the shining stars towards spiritual ascension. My grace is spiritual and theirs is material wealth.”
Djordje Djokovic also read out a message from his brother Novak Djokovic saying: “God sees everything. Morals and ethics as the greatest ideals are the shining stars towards spiritual ascension. My grace is spiritual and theirs is material wealth.”
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,328
