[ad_1]
Are you a vendor?
[ad_1]
Greater than 4 years after SARS-CoV-2 made its international debut, the US Meals and Drug Administration remains to be working to filter out the bogus and unproven merchandise that flooded the market, claiming to stop, deal with, and remedy COVID-19.
The most recent instance is an alcohol-based sanitizer meant to be smeared contained in the nostrils. Based on its maker, the rub can defend you from changing into contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 and different nasty germs, like MRSA, and that safety lasts as much as 12 hours after every swabbing. That each one sounds nice, however in response to the FDA, none of it’s confirmed. In a warning letter launched Tuesday, the company decided the sanitizer, referred to as Nozin, is an unapproved new drug and misbranded.
Whereas ethyl alcohol is utilized in widespread topical antiseptics, like hand sanitizers, the FDA doesn’t usually think about it secure for contained in the nostrils—and the company is unaware of any high-quality scientific knowledge displaying the Nozin is secure, not to mention efficient. The FDA additionally famous that, for common over-the-counter topical antiseptics, calling out particular pathogens it might probably struggle off—like SARS-CoV-2 and MRSA—isn’t allowed beneath company guidelines with out additional FDA evaluation. Making claims about safety length can be not allowed.
The FDA’s warning letter is nothing to sneeze at; the letter threatens seizure and injunction for failing to adequately reply.
Nozin’s maker, Maryland-based World Life Applied sciences Corp., didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark from Ars. On its web site, the corporate touts its product’s effectiveness with a hyperlink to a broadcast examine from 2014, indicating that use of Nozin lowered the colonization ranges of S. aureus and different micro organism within the noses of 20 wholesome well being care employees. The examine didn’t tackle safety from an infection or carriage of any viruses. The corporate additionally lists unpublished research indicating that the product can kill micro organism in laboratory circumstances, doesn’t irritate pores and skin, and lowered bacterial development within the noses of 30 individuals over a 12-hour interval.
That is removed from the primary doubtful, nasal-based COVID product the FDA has referred to as out. There was the Corona-cure nasal spray of 2020, and the Halodine and the NanoBio Shield nasal antiseptics of 2021. That 12 months, the Federal Commerce Fee sued an organization referred to as Xlear over allegedly false claims that its nasal spray can stop and deal with COVID-19. At the very least two extra nasal spray makers acquired FDA warning letters in 2022.
To this point, the FDA has not authorised any nasal sprays to stop or deal with COVID-19, and the scant knowledge on their efficacy stays inconclusive. However there are nonetheless loads of such merchandise on the market on-line. Most, like Nozin, declare to work by killing micro organism and viruses immediately. One product, a nitric oxide nasal spray referred to as Sanotize, is at the moment in a Part III scientific trial to check whether or not it might probably stop SARS-CoV-2 infections. Others declare to work by coating the nasal passage with the gelling agent iota-carrageenan to supply a barrier to viral entry. A pilot scientific trial of 400 well being care employees in Argentina printed in 2021 discovered that the usage of an iota-carrageenan nasal spray led to a 4 % absolute threat discount in SARS-CoV-2 an infection.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
PRODUCTION CREDITS
PATRICK AND THE WHALE
DIRECTED BY
MARK FLETCHER
PRODUCED BY
WALTER KÖHLER
WOLFGANG KNÖPFLER
UNDERWATER PHOTOGRAPHY
GAIL JENKINSON
PATRICK DYKSTRA
ROMAIN BARATS
DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY
RUPERT MURRAY
ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHY
JUSTIN KNÖPFLER
ABDULLATIF NURDIN-HUSSEIN
EDITED BY
MARK FLETCHER
EDIT ASSISTANT
ROLAND MITTERMÜLLER
ONLINE EDITOR
PHILIP TIMM
COLORIST
LEE NIEDERKOFLER
MASTERING
CHRISTIAN VOLLENHOFER-ROHLFING
POST PRODUCTION SUPERVISOR
MICHAEL FRÖCH
MUSIC BY
H. SCOTT SALINAS
MATTHEW ATTICUS BERGER
SOUND DESIGN
BERNHARD ZORZI
FOLEY ARTIST
THOMAS VOGLREITER
VOICE RECORDING
RICHARD EASTICK
JAKOB STUDNICKA
RE-RECORDING MIXER
MICHAEL PLÖDERL
SOUND POST PRODUCTION SUPERVISOR
THOMAS KATHRINER
PRODUCTION COORDINATORS
NINA HOLLER
JOSEPHA MÜLLER-HARTBURG
WHALE GUIDE
NIGEL SERAPHIN
BOAT CAPTAIN
BILL OLIVE
DIVE SUPERVISOR
JOY DAVIDS
ARCHIVE FOOTAGE
PATRICK DYKSTRA
DISCOVERY ACCESS
AMBREGRIS PROD
WILD LOGIC
HOWARD HALL PRODUCTION
AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY
EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS
JAMES REED
ALEXANDER NANAU
DINAH CZEZIK-MÜLLER
MICHAEL FRENSCHKOWSKI
SABINE HOLZER
MARTIN MÉSZÁROS
SPECIAL THANKS
MINISTRY FOR BLUE AND GREEN ECONOMY
FOR NATURE
SERIES EDITOR
JANET HESS
SENIOR PRODUCER
LAURA METZGER LYNCH
SUPERVISING PRODUCER
JAYNE JUN
ASSOCIATE PRODUCER
JAMES F. BURKE
LEGAL COUNSEL
BLANCHE ROBERTSON
DIGITAL LEAD
DANIELLE BROZA
DIGITAL PRODUCER
AMANDA SCHMIDT
SOCIAL MEDIA EDITOR
KAREN HO
AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT
CHELSEY SAATKAMP
BUDGET CONTROLLER
JAYNE LISI
ONLINE EDITOR
STACEY DOUGLASS MOVERLEY
RE-RECORDING MIXER
JON BERMAN
ORIGINAL EPISODE PRODUCTION FUNDING PROVIDED IN PART BY
Bradley L. Goldberg Household Basis
Perpetual Kindness Basis
Solar Hill Renewal Fund
ORIGINAL SERIES PRODUCTION FUNDING PROVIDED IN PART BY
Company for Public Broadcasting
Arnhold Basis
The Fairweather Basis
Kate W. Cassidy Basis
Charles Rosenblum
Kathy Chiao and Ken Hao
Sue and Edgar Wachenheim III
Filomen M. D’Agostino Basis
Lillian Goldman Charitable Belief
Gregg Peters Monsees Basis
Koo and Patricia Yuen
Sandra Atlas Bass
SERIES PRODUCER
BILL MURPHY
EXECUTIVE PRODUCER
FRED KAUFMAN
A PRODUCTION OF TERRA MATER STUDIOS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE WNET GROUP
THIS PROGRAM WAS PRODUCED BY THIRTEEN PRODUCTIONS LLC, WHICH IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS CONTENT.
© 2023 TERRA MATER STUDIOS GMBH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL © 2024 THIRTEEN PRODUCTIONS LLC
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Sep 15, 2023
Catholic critics of feminism usually begin with the idea
that the “first wave” of feminism, led by Nineteenth-century figures such
as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, was principally a
good factor and appropriate with Catholic teachings; solely later in
the Nineteen Sixties and 70s, in accordance with this narrative, was the motion
“hijacked” by “radical feminists”.
The one downside is that when one really appears intently at
feminism in its early type, whether or not that of Stanton and Anthony or
even earlier with Mary Wollstonecraft, one finds apparent
continuities with so-called “radical feminism”.
On the extent of concepts, we discover Enlightenment individualism,
rationalism, and egalitarianism attacking as oppressive the pure
establishments of marriage and household and the divinely ordained
hierarchies of the Church.
On the private degree, feminism was from the start the
brainchild of traumatized, depressing ladies who had deeply
dysfunctional relationships with the boys of their lives – their
concepts eagerly championed by males like Percy Shelley, who “liberated”
ladies with the intention to exploit them.
Carrie Gress returns to the present to debate her e-book The Finish
of Girl: How Smashing the Patriarchy Has Destroyed Us, which
tells the tales of feminist pioneers from Wollstonecraft,
Stanton, and Shelley to Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem.
Hyperlinks
Carrie Gress, The Finish of Girl: How Smashing the Patriarchy
Has Destroyed Us https://www.regnery.com/9781684514182/the-end-of-woman/
Daybreak Eden, “Eve of Deconstruction: Feminism and John Paul
II” https://www.catholicity.com/commentary/eden/03324.html
DONATE to make this present doable! http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio
Go to Catholic Tradition’s web site for tons of written content material,
together with information, articles, liturgical 12 months data, and an enormous library
of paperwork: https://www.catholicculture.org
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
It’s all the time a shock after I hear it.
It shouldn’t be, as a result of I’ve heard it lots of of instances.
Nevertheless it surprises me all the identical, every time I ask an artist if their music is on Spotify or Apple Music, and so they say, “No, I’m solely on Bandcamp.”
Or “I’m solely on SoundCloud.”
Or sound.xyz, or BandLab, or Beatport…
Solely this. Or solely that.
The issue isn’t these platforms. They’re all nice and have unbelievable music communities with distinct habits, cultures, and alternatives.
I’ve been round lengthy sufficient to ensure one factor: YOU would possibly solely be in a single place, however your potential followers are NOT.
I get it although. It could really feel extra manageable, streamlined, and connective to focus on a single platform and user-base. You would possibly assume it’s saner and extra community-minded. Which might be why it’s such a typical mistake artists make.
Now, let me caveat this argument by saying the apparent: It’s your music, and it is best to do no matter is greatest for you, your creativity, and your followers. Nevertheless, when your music is accessible in ONLY one place, you’re not accounting for three fixed challenges within the digital age:
However even diehard followers of a specific style aren’t all loyal to the identical platforms and apps. And amongst a single class reminiscent of DSPs, totally different platforms are dominant in numerous international locations.
You need to NOT assume all of your potential followers favor what you like. You can also’t assume they’ll change their habits or subscriptions to satisfy you the place YOU are at.
The world is stuffed with an excessive amount of music, and too many competing types of leisure. Your music must be available within the locations they ALREADY spend their time.
Correct music distribution solves this, by releasing your music in all places that issues.
One other downside with placing your eggs in a single basket? It assumes issues will keep the identical (or enhance) relating to your skill to develop and nurture an viewers on that platform.
However how usually has that occurred because the days of MySpace?
That’s not even meant as a knock in opposition to corporations that have to monetize. After all they do! They’re companies. However you possibly can’t depend on the phrases remaining the identical. As a result of you aren’t in cost, and the viewers you construct on any platform is just partially your individual.
I’m additionally not arguing that such platforms received’t be worthwhile to you as soon as they modify. META, for example, is now an absolute knowledgeable at taking cash from labels and artists in trade for attain and conversions. I’d nonetheless argue it’s top-of-the-line methods you possibly can spend cash as a musician.
But when ALL your exercise is remoted to a single platform, the dangers to you’re all of the higher, if and when the platform evolves.
Correct music distribution helps restrict these dangers, as a result of your music has already been despatched to many competing platforms. And by extension, meaning you could have already got audiences on these different platforms too.
In contrast to diamonds, platforms don’t final.
Consideration shifts. Habits change. Codecs die. Firms merge, or go extinct.
And whereas it might sound absurd to you as we speak to contemplate that (insert your favourite music or social platform) will probably be out of enterprise tomorrow, it’s occurred earlier than. And it’ll occur once more. Again and again.
Music distribution future-proofs you in opposition to this danger. As a result of whereas any distributed catalog will probably go down with the ship on these dimming or useless platforms, who cares? As a result of those self same songs will ALSO be delivered to all the brand new upstarts who stand to interchange the previous giants.
Maintaining your music and your neighborhood engagement restricted to 1 platform might sound like the simplest, most targeted, and even hippest path ahead.
Nevertheless it’s shortsighted.
You need your music to final a very long time, proper? Then don’t depend on ONLY Bandcamp, or SoundCloud, or some other single platform.
Correct music distribution is without doubt one of the greatest methods to outmaneuver these three large challenges talked about above. And fortunately, it’s fairly straightforward as we speak to launch your music the precise means.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
The White Home dismissed repeated requests from Home Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) for a gathering with President Joe Biden, stating that there isn’t any want for negotiations.
What Occurred: The White Home press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, on Wednesday, once more rebuffed Johnson’s request for a gathering with Biden amid border deal chaos, arguing that there isn’t any want for negotiations.
“What’s there to barter? Actually, really, what’s the one-on-one negotiation about when he is been offered with precisely what he requested for?” Jean-Pierre mentioned.
“He is negotiating with himself. He is killing payments on his personal.”
Johnson on Wednesday instructed the media that has been in search of a gathering with Biden for a number of weeks to debate border and nationwide safety points. Nonetheless, the White Home has not granted the request.
“A month I have been asking to take a seat down with the president to speak in regards to the border and discuss nationwide safety, and that assembly has not been granted,” Johnson mentioned.
“And I will proceed to insist on that, as a result of they’re very critical points that have to be addressed. And if the Speaker of the Home cannot meet with the president of the USA, that is an issue.”
Johnson has been advocating for a bipartisan nationwide safety funding invoice that features border safety provisions. The Senate not too long ago handed a bipartisan border safety bundle, however Johnson has declared it “lifeless on arrival” within the Home.
See Additionally: ‘He Has Misplaced His Marbles:’ Elon Musk Reacts To Billionaire’s Anti-Tesla Tremendous Bowl Advert Underneath Scrutiny By Transport Security Regulator (UPDATED)
Why It Issues: The rejection of Johnson’s request for a gathering with Biden underscores the continuing impasse between the 2 events on nationwide safety and border points. This deadlock has been additional difficult by the collapse of a bipartisan border deal, which former President Donald Trump claimed credit score for. Trump took satisfaction within the failure of the bipartisan border deal throughout a speech to the Nationwide Rifle Affiliation in Harrisburg, Pa., final week. He mentioned, “I feel we killed it. I feel it’s lifeless!”
Biden additionally pointed the finger at Trump for the collapse of a border safety plan. The plan, initially demanded by Republicans, aimed to sort out immigration and safety points on the U.S.-Mexico border. Nonetheless, the deal was reportedly sabotaged by Republicans, allegedly beneath Trump’s affect, after 4 months of negotiations.
In the meantime, the current impeachment of Homeland Safety Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has additional strained relations, with Biden criticizing the GOP for his or her actions. The GOP is gunning for Mayorkas for not being strict sufficient on border safety and refusing to “adjust to the legislation” as they assert that he violated immigration legal guidelines by failing to detain a enough variety of migrants.
Picture by Trevor Bexon on Shutterstock
Learn Subsequent: Jamie Raskin Raises Skepticism Over Witness Claims In GOP’s Biden Impeachment Inquiry
This content material was partially produced with the assistance of Benzinga Neuro and was reviewed and revealed by Benzinga editors.
[ad_2]