Connect with us

Government

Planned Parenthood Abortions Among ‘Top Four Leading Causes Of Death’ In America

Planned Parenthood Abortions Among ‘Top Four Leading Causes Of Death’ In America

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

on

Planned Parenthood Abortions Among 'Top Four Leading Causes Of Death' In America

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Abortions conducted by Planned Parenthood are a leading cause of death in the United States, with the organization recommending the procedure to pregnant clients 97 percent of the time, according to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group.

A Planned Parenthood facility in Anaheim, Calif., on September 10, 2020. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

Planned Parenthood, the country’s largest abortion provider, released its 2022–2023 annual report revealing the organization conducted 392,715 abortions during the period. “This puts abortions performed by Planned Parenthood in the top four leading causes of death in the United States, after heart disease, cancer, and COVID-19,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group.

According to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 695,000 Americans died from heart disease in 2021, with 605,000 dying from cancer, 416,000 from COVID-19, and nearly 225,000 from accidents.

“Once again, pregnant women who walk into Planned Parenthood are sold an abortion 97 percent of the time, rather than helped to keep their child or make an adoption plan. Meanwhile, they saw 80,000 fewer patients, provided 60,000 fewer pap tests and breast exams, and even gave out less contraception, she said.

Ms. Dannenfelser blamed Democrats in Washington and several other states for backing Planned Parenthood abortions by sending them almost $700 million in taxpayer funds. This amount made up a third of the organization’s revenue, with Planned Parenthood ending the fiscal year with $2.5 billion in net assets, she noted.

Around 60 percent of women who have had an abortion “would rather have kept their babies if they just had more emotional or financial support,” Ms. Dannenfelser stated. “Democrats’ response? They demonize and strip funding from pregnancy resource centers that serve women and their children.”

Michael New, a social scientist and senior associate scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, pointed out that Planned Parenthood’s abortion number was a record for the organization, representing around 40 percent of total abortions performed in the United States.

While boosting its abortion numbers, Planned Parenthood also “continues to cut back on several health services,” he said. “Between 2022 and 2023, preventive-care visits fell by 31.0 percent, pap tests fell by 13.5 percent, cancer screenings fell by 1.4 percent, and adoption referrals fell by 4.5 percent.”

“In the past ten years, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood has increased by 20 percent. Meanwhile, cancer screenings fell by more than 58 percent, and prenatal services declined by more than 67 percent.”

Despite cutting back on several healthcare services in 2022, Planned Parenthood continues to see an increase in government funding, Mr. New noted.

Funding, Election Issue

Republican lawmakers have been trying to cut back government funding for Planned Parenthood. In January last year, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed a draft bill to defund the organization by instituting a one-year moratorium on federal funding for the organization.

The nation’s largest abortion provider has no business receiving taxpayer dollars,” she said at the time. “Planned Parenthood claims these funds go to healthcare for women, but last year, Planned Parenthood performed a record number of abortions while also reducing the number of well-woman exams and breast cancer screenings it performed.”

In a Dec. 12 press release, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) questioned the funding provided to Planned Parenthood, citing a report by the U.S. Government Accountability (GAO) to point out that the organization received $1.78 billion in federal taxpayer funding in fiscal years 2019–2021.

The amount included $90.4 million the group allegedly “illegally siphoned” from the Paycheck Protection Program, a COVID-19 loan program aimed at assisting small businesses affected by the pandemic.

“While small businesses struggled to make ends meet during the pandemic, Planned Parenthood illegally siphoned over $90 million from the Paycheck Protection Program, specifically designed to help our mom-and-pop shops keep their doors open,” Ms. Blackburn said.

Commenting on the report, Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), co-chair of the House Pro-Life Caucus, said that federal taxpayer funds “should not be funneled to big abortion corporations like Planned Parenthood, which has killed over 9.3 million unborn children since 1970, including 1.11 million between 2019-2021.”

The Planned Parenthood annual report comes as abortion is one of the key themes in the upcoming presidential race. Democrats are pushing abortion as a central issue, running ballot initiatives in battleground states.

In Arizona, a ballot measure seeks to amend the state’s constitution to ensure that abortion is a “fundamental right,” even up to the point where a baby can survive outside the womb, which typically happens around 24 weeks. Nevada, Colorado, and Maryland also have abortion amendments planned out.

“The Democrats’ strategy heading into this election cycle was to put these measures on the ballot in every big swing state,” Republican strategist Marcus Dell'Artino told The Epoch Times.

Former President Donald Trump, who is running for his second term in the 2024 elections, has stopped short of echoing other Republicans’ calls for a national abortion ban, saying that the matter is best left to the states.

“My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state,” he said in a recent video posted on Truth Social.

“Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/22/2024 - 19:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Royal Caribbean shares huge onboard health and safety news

The cruise line has taken steps to make cruises safer and those efforts have been working.

Published

on

When you go to a hotel or a theme park and get infected with a virus, you don't know exactly what happened. Maybe you caught the virus at the airport, in a rest stop, on an airplane, or even at your hotel or in a restaurant.

That's generally because by the time you get sick, you're no longer at the place where you got infected. Cruise ships, however, lack the same plausible deniability, and historically viruses spread quickly on ships.

Related: Royal Caribbean bets big on new ships, private destinations

On a seven-day cruise, you might actually have picked up an illness at the supermarket or at work, but when you get sick on the ship, people blame the cruise line. When someone falls ill, cruise lines don't actually care where they got infected. They simply want to slow down the spread of the disease.

That has always been the case, but the Covid pandemic and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shutting down the cruise industry from the U.S. for over a year put shipboard illness under a bigger microscope. For months, the federal agency reported on onboard Covid levels and did little to share all of the steps the major cruise lines had taken to mitigate outbreaks.

Now, with Covid becoming less of a concern, Royal Caribbean has shared some big news about its efforts to control another virus, norovirus, which spreads quickly on ships. 

Cruise ships put thousands of people in relatively close quarters.

Image source: Dukas/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Royal Caribbean has made ships safer

"Norovirus is a very contagious virus that causes vomiting and diarrhea. Anyone can get infected and sick with norovirus. Norovirus is sometimes called the 'stomach flu' or 'stomach bug.' However, norovirus illness is not related to the flu, which is caused by influenza virus," according to the CDC.

The virus can cause problems on cruise ships, but it's actually a pretty rare occurrence.

"Norovirus is the most frequent (over 90%) cause of outbreaks of diarrheal disease on cruise ships and these outbreaks often get media attention, which is why some people call norovirus the 'cruise ship virus.' However, norovirus outbreaks on cruise ships account for only a small percentage (1%) of all reported norovirus outbreaks," the federal agency reported.

You are much more likely to get norovirus in a land-based restaurant or healthcare facility than on a cruise ship, but cruise outbreaks make for good stories and get widespread media attention.

Royal Caribbean began its Norovirus Eradication Campaign in 2023. It's a six-step program that has worked to stop outbreaks on its ships, the Royal Caribbean Blog reported.

Royal Caribbean's plan has worked

Royal Caribbean has enacted a comprehensive plan designed to contain norovirus and prevent its spread.

  1. Enhanced acute GI training for onboard medical teams and traveling doctors
  2. Increased doctor oversight of its Outbreak Prevention Plan, which covers requirements like hand washing, buffet oversight, and disinfectant mandates for all public areas aboard its ships.
  3. Switching to PDI SaniCloth Prime hospital-grade disinfectant wipes, wipes certified to kill norovirus by the EPA.

  4. New contactless tap technology, eliminating the need for crew to handle guest cards

  5. Enhanced crew training on what to do when experiencing acute GI symptoms and how to avoid cross-contamination in food and beverage service areas

  6. An update to Royal Caribbean's Safety & Quality Management system to stop self-service in buffets if the onboard norovirus rate exceeds 1.5%

"After the eradication campaign was implemented in June 2023, there was not a single norovirus outbreak onboard any Royal Caribbean International or Celebrity Cruise ship for the remainder of 2023," the report shared.

Celebrity Constellation, however, did have an outbreak in January 2024 that was listed on a CDC website, according to Royal Caribbean Blog.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Nike CEO blames oddly specific problem for brand issues

The footwear and apparel company has been losing ground to its competitors.

Published

on

Blink and you might miss an important trend when it comes to the fashion industry.

Thanks to the rapid integration of social media by virtually all fashion brands – and the breakneck pace at which fans of fashion use social media – trends or movements can come and go in the blink of an eye. 

Related: Some Walmarts make surprising self-checkout change

Whether its brands being showcased on Snapchat during New York Fashion Week, the metaverse hosting its very own fashion week, or influencers showing off their latest styles on TikTok, it can be tough to keep up. 

This is especially the case with footwear. As athletes influencers build their own brands (and social media presence), it's important for them to stay on top of what's considered cool to wear, and what may be a little outdated. In fact, it's kind of a part of their jobs. 

Currently, what's old is cool again. Vintage footwear styles like Adidas' Sambas and Campus sneakers are everywhere from the high streets of London to college campuses in the United States. So-called dad shoes – specifically New Balance's highly popular Unisex 530 sneakers – are almost always sold out in stores and online. 

So establishing a foothold for Nike  (NKE) , which has historically specialized in sleek silhouettes and bright colors, has been tough when neutral and chunky styles are now popular. 

As a result, Nike has been struggling to gain back the enthusiasm its brand once enjoyed so steadily during the earlier 2000s. 

A pedestrian walks past a Nike store in Hong Kong.

SOPA Images/Getty Images

Nike CEO identifies a problem

Some CEOs have called out Nike, claiming "they stopped a little bit bringing in new stuff,” per JD Sports CEO Régis Schultz earlier this month, adding "shoppers get bored very quickly."

Aware that growth and imagination seem to be an issue at his company, Nike CEO John Donahue isolated one particular issue that may be to blame, claiming the problem "is fairly straightforward."

Since the onset of the pandemic, Nike adopted a remote work policy that Donahue said hurt its competitive edge. 

“But even more importantly, our employees were working from home for two and a half years,” Donahoe said in an interview with CNBC. “And in hindsight, it turns out, it’s really hard to do bold, disruptive innovation, to develop a boldly disruptive shoe, on Zoom.”

Eager to right the ship, however, Donahue says the company has been working on a “bold, disruptive” plan to churn out new products and hopefully reinvigorate excitement for the brand. 

“So we realigned our company, and over the last year we have been ruthlessly focused on rebuilding our disruptive innovation pipeline along with our iterative innovation pipeline,” he said. “So the pipeline is as strong as ever.”

Nike plans a comeback

Nike stock is down 11% year-to-date, and in December the sneaker maker slashed its revenue outlook for the forthcoming fiscal year, citing weaker digital demand in the U.S. and stronger headwinds in its key Europe-Mideast-Asia region. 

It also announced a $2 billion cost-cutting plan. In February, Nike laid off 2% of its employees. It has also been working to streamline and simplify some of its lines.

But the sneaker maker is planning a comeback in 2024. 

It plans to make the upcoming 2024 Paris Summer Olympics an exhibition for some of its refreshed product lines, specifically in the track and field category. 

“We’ve done more to advance running than any brand in the world over the last 50 years and we continue to lead with elite runners,” Donahoe added. “Innovation has always been what’s marked Nike in running, as in other categories, and so we’re not just going to copy what other people do.”

Read More

Continue Reading

International

The language of insolvency: why getting it wrong can harm struggling firms

The law can help struggling firms turn their business around, but stigma around the legal terms may be deterring companies from acting in time.

Published

on

Business failures are on the rise in Britain Michaelpuche/Shutterstock

Business failures are on the rise in Britain, with several high-profile names lost already this year. But since the 1980s, the UK has made it a priority to throw a lifeline to struggling companies. It appears, however, that these efforts to enhance the law are being hampered by sloppy language in the media, increasing the stigma around insolvency and potentially deterring businesses from seeking help.

Legal terms and concepts need to be accurate. The law of insolvency is no different.

Unfortunately, accuracy is often missing in insolvency coverage. MPs have used insolvency terms incorrectly, while media outlets, including the BBC, have a habit of referring to insolvency procedures in overly negative, and sometimes inaccurate, terms. In particular, the administration procedure, which is aimed at rescuing a company, is often discussed using words like “collapse”. This misleadingly associates it with the process of liquidation, which is aimed at removing a company from the market.

So what is the correct language to use when we’re discussing insolvency?

Corporate insolvency law

There are no fewer than six procedures which can be used by struggling companies.

They are found in the Insolvency Act 1986 (liquidation, administration, company voluntary arrangements (CVAs) and standalone moratoriums) and in the Companies Act 2006 (schemes of arrangement and restructuring plans).

Liquidation is used to gather in and sell the assets of the insolvent company for the benefit of its creditors – that is, the parties who are owed money by the insolvent firm. The liquidator then distributes the value of the assets among the creditors of the company in a ranked order, known as the “insolvency waterfall”. The liquidator replaces the board of directors and takes control of the day-to-day management of the company. At the end of the liquidation process, the company is dissolved and no longer exists. For example, Lloyds Pharmacy has recently gone through liquidation, and subsequently disappeared from high streets and Sainsbury’s stores.

Administration is a procedure that has been used by several high-profile names already this year, including Ted Baker most recently. The procedure was introduced in 1986 as a tool to rescue companies (that is, keep a firm afloat rather than liquidate it). Similar to the liquidation process, directors of the company are sidelined during administration and the administrator assumes day-to-day management.

There is also the Special Administration procedure, which is used for certain nationally important sectors, and which the Liberal Democrats have suggested for troubled Thames Water.

CVAs are another rescue procedure. It is a voluntary arrangement between the company and its creditors, supervised and approved by an insolvency practitioner (that is, someone who is licensed to act on behalf of an insolvent company). Crucially, a CVA is called a “debtor in possession” procedure because directors are left “in possession” (in charge) of the company – unlike in a liquidation or administration process. For example, after calling in administrators earlier this year, The Body Shop is now thought to be seeking a CVA.

The Body Shop store frontage
Can a CVA help The Body Shop turn things around? Yau Ming Low/Shutterstock

The standalone moratorium (introduced in 2020) can be used by companies together with, or independently from, any other procedure. Directors are given 20 business days to assess their rescue and recovery options. During the moratorium, the company will continue to operate under the control of the directors and the moratorium allows them the 20 days’ breathing space from creditors.

The scheme of arrangement, regulated by the Companies Act 2006, is a procedure available to companies that are not yet insolvent. It is used as a debt restructuring tool or to alter the company’s financial obligations. Essentially, it involves a deal between a company and its creditors and shareholders. Think of it as something akin to an individual consolidating their credit cards, or arranging a plan to repay arrears.

Lastly, closely modelled on the scheme of arrangement, the restructuring plan procedure introduced in 2020 is available to companies that have encountered, or may encounter, financial difficulties that are likely to affect their ability to carry on business.

The reality of corporate insolvency

Clearly, the legislative priority in the UK over the past 40 years has been to promote corporate rescue and renewal. This should, in principle, be particularly useful to British businesses at a time when the UK has seen a record number of business failures, with no fewer than 26,595 corporate insolvencies in 2023. That figure is 14% higher than in 2022 and 43% higher than pre-pandemic levels in 2019. It is predicted that this number will rise to 33,000 in 2024.

With an increasing number of companies in financial difficulty, we might have expected that corporate rescue cases would have risen too. But this is not the case. Rescue cases have dropped from 10% in 2019 to a rather woeful 6% in 2023. That means that in 2023, 94% of these companies (by our calculations 21,961 in total) were liquidated.

This shows that while the law is here to help, something is preventing struggling businesses from using it. While there are more factors at play, it is clear that inaccurate wording, including misleading language by politicians and the media, play a very important role. The stigma around experiencing financial difficulties and the negative way this is talked about may prevent businesses from looking for help at a time when it would provide the greatest chance of turning things around.

This is not just an academic point but it has real-world ramifications. The economic climate is challenging enough for companies. Lumping further issues on to indebted firms really isn’t helpful.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending