so not only can people with chronic illnesses or the disabled be killed, saving millions of dollars of taxpsyer money, but they can profit off the organs too.
Close to 15,000 nurses are participating, making it the biggest nurses strike the city has ever seen. Most union members voted last month to authorize the walkout.
Anticipating the possibility of a strike,
New York’s governor, Kathy Hochul, declared a state of emergency on Friday and urged hospital administrators and union leaders to reach a last-minute agreement. She warned that a strike “could jeopardize the lives of thousands of New Yorkers and patients”.
“I’m strongly encouraging everyone to stay at the table, both sides, management and the nurses, until this is resolved,” Hochul said.
As in the 2023 labor dispute, the current conflict centers on a complex mix of grievances, rebuttals and hospital-specific concerns. Staffing remains a key source of contention, with nurses arguing that well-funded hospitals are unwilling to commit to standards that ensure safe and manageable workloads....
and the socialist Mayor is backing the nurses.
Here in the Philippines, people study nursing so they can get a job overseas. If they can't pass the test to work in the US UK or Australia, they can still work in Saudi or the middle east, or get a job working as a caregiver, as our relatives do in the UK>
The nursing shortage is constant, and with the aging population and with the increase in paperwork required in hospitals, you can see that this is a good profession.
But does the influx of overseas nurses depress wages for US Nurses? well, it's more complicated than that. For example, not just requiring nurses doing paper work instead of caring for patients leads many nurses to quit, but a similar emphasis on adminstration and paperwork leads to more jobs in administration in hospitals, which means using money that would be better spent on nurses.
but is this partly due to cheap imported nurses enabling hospitals to hire cheaper outsiders? (if you read the Guardian article you note they will staff using temporary nurses: There are entire companies that supply nurses and doctors to where they are needed but it will cost the hospitals more money... so the hospital management is willing to spend money for expensive temps, but not for regular nurses?)
The impact of imported (foreign-educated or internationally recruited) nurses on salaries for nurses in the USA is a debated topic, with mixed evidence from academic studies, labor market analyses, and policy discussions.
Key Evidence from StudiesResearch generally shows that large-scale immigration of foreign-trained registered nurses (RNs) increases the overall supply of nurses in certain areas (e.g., states or cities with high concentrations). This can lead to some downward pressure on wages or earnings, but the effects are often limited, inconsistent, or offset by other factors like persistent nurse shortages, institutional wage rigidity in healthcare (e.g., union contracts, hospital budgeting), and strong demand driven by an aging population.
Several studies find evidence of modest negative effects:
Immigration increases nurse supply and is associated with a decrease in annual earnings for U.S.-trained nurses (though hourly wages show less consistent or no decline). For example, a 10% increase in immigrant supply might reduce salaries by roughly 1–4% in some models.
This is often linked to foreign nurses filling gaps in less desirable shifts, locations, or facilities, which can indirectly affect overall compensation packages.
Other research finds little to no significant negative impact on wages:Hiring foreign-educated nurses does not lower U.S.-educated nurses' wages or lead to widespread unemployment for domestic nurses.
Despite large inflows (e.g., tripling of foreign nurses passing licensing exams in some periods), observed wages for native nurses show little decline, possibly due to market power in healthcare and employers' reluctance to cut pay amid ongoing shortages.
Foreign nurses often work longer hours or in specific roles, and their presence may not directly compete in the same segments as many domestic nurses.
Overall, the consensus from peer-reviewed economic analyses is that any wage suppression is small and not universal, especially compared to the broader benefits of addressing shortages (e.g., maintaining patient care quality and avoiding even worse staffing crises).
Periods of heavy recruitment (like post-2000 or during/after the COVID-19 pandemic) coincide with wage growth in many cases due to high demand.
Contextual Factors
Prevailing wage rules in immigration programs (e.g., EB-3 for nurses, which is common for permanent residency) require employers to pay foreign nurses at or above the prevailing wage for the role and location, with protections to avoid adversely affecting U.S. workers' wages and conditions.
Nurse unions (e.g., National Nurses United) often express concerns about foreign recruitment potentially undermining domestic wages, working conditions, or incentives for better pay/staffing. They advocate for stronger domestic training and retention over heavy reliance on imports.
The U.S. has faced chronic nurse shortages (projected to worsen with retirements and aging populations), which drive recruitment from countries like the Philippines, India, and Nigeria. This demand often pushes wages upward overall, counteracting potential suppression.
Bottom Line
Imported nurses do not dramatically lower salaries for U.S. nurses on a widespread basis, according to most evidence. At most, they exert modest downward pressure in specific markets or on annual earnings (e.g., through more supply in high-immigration areas), but this is frequently outweighed by shortage-driven wage increases, regulatory protections, and the need to fill critical gaps.If you're concerned about this in a specific region, state-level data or union perspectives might provide more tailored insights. The bigger picture is that foreign nurses help sustain the healthcare system amid ongoing domestic supply challenges.
too long to post but they end up saying it is a few people with actual brain diseases but different types and many of those this one doctor diagnosed are just psychological problems. The culprit hinted at is pesticides or pollution, but if this was true, why just in this area? I mean it is a trendy claim but doesn't make sense.
The first thing came to my mind was CJD from deer wasting syndrome: A prion disease that there have been cases diagnosed in the USA in those eating deer meat.
The other thing came to my mind is Mad Cow disease in the UK, which had a similar coverup.
Grok says they tested for this and didn't find prion disease. But I thought prion disease was hard to diagnose but never mind:
The mysterious neurological syndrome reported in New Brunswick, Canada, starting around 2019–2021, initially raised concerns because it presented symptoms somewhat similar to prion diseases like Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) — a rare, fatal brain disorder caused by misfolded proteins (prions). These symptoms included rapid cognitive decline, muscle spasms, ataxia (loss of coordination), behavioral changes, and dementia-like effects.Health authorities, including the Canadian Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Surveillance System (CJDSS), investigated a cluster of cases (initially around 40–48, later reported to grow significantly). Testing explicitly ruled out known human prion diseases, including CJD and any variant linked to animal prions.
Early speculation included the possibility of a novel prion disease potentially related to chronic wasting disease (CWD) — a prion disease affecting deer, elk, moose, and other cervids (sometimes called "zombie deer disease").
CWD is well-established in parts of Canada (mainly Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, British Columbia, and Quebec) and the U.S., but no cases have been confirmed in wild or farmed deer in New Brunswick. There is also no documented evidence of CWD transmitting to humans, despite ongoing research into potential zoonotic risks.
However, extensive follow-up investigations, including a major 2025 peer-reviewed study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), reassessed cases through independent clinical evaluations and autopsies.
The conclusions were clear: No evidence supported a single new/mystery neurological disease or any prion-related cause (including CWD-like prions).
The cases were attributed to well-known conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, functional neurological disorders, traumatic brain injury, metastatic cancer, and other established neurodegenerative or non-neurodegenerative issues.
Autopsies (including those using specific tests for CWD prions) showed no prion pathology.
Statistical analysis indicated the probability of an undetected novel disease in the broader cluster was extremely low (less than 0.001).
Public Health New Brunswick has largely concluded its investigation into a "neurological syndrome of unknown cause," recommending affected individuals seek care through specialized clinics for their diagnosed conditions.
Some ongoing reviews or debates persisted into late 2025/early 2026, but the scientific consensus points to misdiagnosis rather than a new prion-linked outbreak.
For context on animal prion diseases in the region:CWD in deer (and related cervids) remains a concern across North America, spreading through saliva, urine, feces, and contaminated environments — but it has not been detected in New Brunswick deer.
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or mad cow disease) in cows is extremely rare in Canada due to strict controls (no recent cases), and no links to human cases in New Brunswick.
In summary, the New Brunswick brain disease cluster was not a prion disease in humans, nor connected to prion diseases in deer or cows. It appears to have stemmed from a combination of known neurological conditions, with initial similarities to CJD leading to the prion investigation that was ultimately ruled out.
The results suggest that CHARM can safely suppress prion protein levels in brain cells. It thus could form the basis for potential prion disease treatments. Other neurodegenerative diseases, such as Huntington’s, are also caused by a buildup of toxic misfolded proteins. CHARM might help with treating these diseases as well..
🚨Massive MAHA win today on phthalate chemicals!
The Trump EPA just completed our TSCA risk evaluation of phthalates; the most comprehensive assessment of phthalates ever conducted by EPA. We are now announcing that, following gold standard science, promoting radical…
thalates are a series of widely used chemicals that demonstrate to be endocrine disruptors and are detrimental to human health. Phthalates can be found in most products that have contact with plastics during producing, packaging, or delivering. Despite the short half-lives in tissues, chronic exposure to phthalates will adversely influence the endocrine system and functioning of multiple organs, which has negative long-term impacts on the success of pregnancy, child growth and development, and reproductive systems in both young children and adolescents.
essentially, these are some of the chemicals in plastics that leech out into the enfvironment: or directly to you (plastic bottles leech it to you).
and these chemicals induce problems, including metabololic syndrome, aka pre diabetes and obesity.
Grok summary because it is easier to understand than my descripgionn or the description on many medical sites like the one I posted above:
What Are Phthalates?Phthalates are a group of synthetic chemicals primarily used as plasticizers to increase the flexibility, durability, and longevity of plastics, especially polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Common examples include:
DEHP (di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate)
DBP (dibutyl phthalate)
BBP (benzyl butyl phthalate)
DEP (diethyl phthalate)
DINP (diisononyl phthalate)
They are also used as solvents in cosmetics, fragrances, and personal care products to retain scents or improve texture.
Examples of phthalate chemical structures (e.g., DEHP, DBP, and others).Sources of Human ExposurePhthalates are ubiquitous due to their widespread use and ability to leach from products. Primary routes include ingestion, inhalation, dermal absorption, and medical procedures.
Fragranced lotions, shampoos, perfumes, nail polish
Dermal absorption, inhalation
Food Processing
Gloves, tubing in factories
Ingestion (contamination of processed foods)
Medical Devices
IV tubing, blood bags
Direct (during procedures)
Household Items
Paints, adhesives, air fresheners
Inhalation, dust
Visuals showing common sources like cosmetics, plastics, and pollution pathways.Nearly all humans have detectable phthalate metabolites in urine, with higher levels in children and women due to product use.Impacts on Human HealthPhthalates are classified as endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), interfering with hormone systems. They have short half-lives but chronic low-level exposure causes cumulative effects. Vulnerable groups include fetuses, infants, and children.Key health concerns, supported by epidemiological reviews and animal studies:
Reproductive Health — Strong evidence links prenatal exposure to reduced anogenital distance in boys, lower semen quality, altered hormone levels (e.g., testosterone), endometriosis, and fertility issues in adults.
Developmental Effects — Associations with neurodevelopmental issues (e.g., ADHD, autism traits), lower IQ, behavioral problems, and childhood asthma.
Metabolic & Other — Links to obesity, type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, thyroid disruption, and potential cancers (e.g., breast).
Mechanisms — Anti-androgenic effects, oxidative stress, epigenetic changes, and interference with nuclear receptors.
Infographics summarizing health effects and exposure risks.While some industry sources emphasize benefits (e.g., in medical devices saving lives) and low exposure risks, scientific consensus from bodies like the EPA and reviews highlights unreasonable risks at real-world levels, especially cumulatively.Regulations and Trends (as of 2026)
US Federal → CPSIA bans 8 phthalates (>0.1%) in children's toys/childcare articles. EPA is evaluating risks for additional phthalates under TSCA, with recent findings of unreasonable risks in industrial uses.
State-Level → Bans/restrictions in cosmetics (e.g., Washington), food packaging, and toys (e.g., New York effective 2025).
FDA → Revoked many food contact authorizations; monitoring remaining uses.
Global → EU has stricter limits; some countries ban specific phthalates in more products.
Exposure to some phthalates has declined due to substitutions, but replacements (e.g., DINCH) need monitoring.Reducing Exposure
Choose phthalate-free or fragrance-free personal care products.
Avoid heating food in plastic containers; use glass/stainless steel.
Minimize processed foods and vinyl products.
Dust/vacuum regularly to reduce household accumulation.
Overall, while phthalates provide practical benefits in plastics, substantial evidence supports minimizing exposure, particularly for reproductive and child health. Ongoing research and regulation aim to balance utility with safety.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,
one problem: how does one replace this chemical without a huge increase in prices and maybe replacing it with something else that ha it's own dangers?
