Congratulations 10 Batesville High School track and field athletes for being named to the Academic All-State Team! Six individuals were named to the first team and 4 were honorable mention.Academic All-State 1st Team were: Emma Gausman, Adam Bedel, Joseph Choi, Quinten Gowdy, Christopher Laymon and George Ritter.Honorable Mentions were: Stephanie Nobbe, Dylan Flannery, Eykis Fullenkamp and James Gosmeyer.Courtesy of Bulldogs Coach Lisa Gausman.
Station 34 WHAT:Free car seat safety check event Brighton, MI 48116 2755 Dorr Road WHEN:Friday, September 25, 2015 from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
By Dr. Ananya Mandal, MDDec 18 2018A review analysed 5,300 cases of liver transplants on children across the country. The team of researchers from the Johns Hopkins Medicine looked at the patients who were more likely to survive after a split liver transplant. A split liver transplant is a type of transplant where the recipient receives only a part of the donor’s liver.The results showed that there were no long term health risks among the recipients of such split livers. The team believes that this could allow for more availability of donor livers as a single donor liver can be used for more than one recipient. The results of the review were published in the latest issue of the journal Liver Transplantation.Lead author of the study, Douglas Mogul, medical director of the Pediatric Liver Transplant Program at Johns Hopkins Children Center and assistant professor of pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine said that the upside of this research is the reduction in the number of children waiting for a donor liver. He called dying of such children on the waitlist for a donor liver as the “worst possible outcome”. He added that for the past three decades there have been split liver transplants and in this around 35 to 40 percent of the liver could be used. Children with a smaller body weight can greatly benefit. He explained that a single donor liver can thus be split and transplanted to two children.Mogul and his colleague Dorry Segev, professor of surgery at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine along with the whole team of researchers used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to look at the medical records of 5,345 children who had received either a split liver or a whole liver transplant in the US between 2002 March to 2015 December.Mogul said that outcome of these transplants depends on several factors including age, general health, body weight etc. He added, “. But understanding which of these variables could impact the outcomes from transplanting a split liver versus a whole liver could help guide the increased use of split livers and identify which patients will do best after split or whole liver transplants, thereby being more strategic about matching donor organs with recipients.”The team looked at the variables that could influence the outcome of the patients and tried to assess the transplant success of both whole and split liver transplants. They found that of the 5,345 transplants in the children, 31 percent (1,694 patients) received a split liver transplant while 68 percent (3,651 patients) received a whole liver transplant. Those who had a split liver transplant received their livers from another pediatric donor in 59 percent cases while those with whole livers received their livers from another child donor in 83 percent cases. Those with split liver transplants were less likely to have received their livers from a donor who had a lack of oxygen before death and were more likely to have died of head injuries.Related StoriesRevolutionary gene replacement surgery restores vision in patients with retinal degenerationNovel biomarker-guided approach has potential for treatment of common liver cancerGuidelines to help children develop healthy habits early in lifeResults superficially showed that those with a split liver transplant did not do as well as those with a whole liver transplant. However after all the other factors were taken into consideration, the outcomes of both types of transplants were similar. Mogul explained that those patients or the sickest of the children were anticipated to fail with their transplants more commonly. But this study showed that their outcome was not further negatively affected by the split liver transplant.Results revealed that those recipients who weighed less than 10 kg were more likely to experience transplant failure in all the cases. Those who weighed between 10 and 35 kg however were 1.46 times more likely to experience transplant failure with split livers compared to whole livers. This means that patients of this weight group should preferably receive whole liver transplants, write the authors of the study. They noted that 22 children died while waiting on the list but could have benefited from a split liver transplant.Mogul adds, “We hope these findings can help guide surgical decision-making and support policy changes that promote the increased use of SLT for selected children.” His colleague Segev adds, “The better understanding of SLT learned from this study and our most recent research is a critical step toward the goal of significantly increasing access to transplantation…If they wanted to, UNOS–the United Network for Organ Sharing, the entity responsible for U.S. organ allocation policies–could institute policies within one to two years that would have huge impacts on children waiting for liver transplants.”The study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.Source: https://aasldpubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lt.25340
Facebook likes can tell a lot about a person. Maybe even enough to fuel a voter-manipulation effort like the one a Trump-affiliated data-mining firm stands accused of—and which Facebook may have enabled. Cambridge Analytica: firm at the heart of Facebook scandal Cambridge was backed by the conservative billionaire Richard Mercer, and at one point employed Stephen Bannon—later Trump’s campaign chairman and White House adviser—as a vice president.The type of data mining reportedly used by Cambridge Analytica is fairly common, but is typically used to sell diapers and other products. Netflix, for instance, provides individualized recommendations based on how a person’s viewing behaviors fit with what other customers watch.But that common technique can take on an ominous cast if it’s connected to possible elections meddling, said Robert Ricci, a marketing director at Blue Fountain Media.Wylie said Cambridge Analytica aimed to “explore mental vulnerabilities of people.” He said the firm “works on creating a web of disinformation online so people start going down the rabbit hole of clicking on blogs, websites etc. that make them think things are happening that may not be.”Wylie told “Today” that while political ads are also targeted at specific voters, the Cambridge effort aimed to make sure people wouldn’t know they were getting messages aimed at influencing their views.The Trump campaign has denied using Cambridge’s data. The firm itself denies wrongdoing, and says it didn’t retain any of the data pulled from Facebook and didn’t use it in its 2016 campaign work.Yet Cambridge boasted of its work after Cruz won the GOP caucuses in Iowa in 2016.Cambridge helped differentiate Cruz from his similarly minded Republican rivals by identifying automated red light cameras as an issue of importance to residents upset with government intrusion. Potential voters living near the red light cameras were sent direct messages saying Cruz was against their use.Even on mainstay issues such as gun rights, Cambridge CEO Alexander Nix said at the time, the firm used personality types to tailor its messages. For voters who care about tradition, it might push the importance of making sure grandfathers can offer family shooting lessons. For someone identified as introverted, a pitch might describe keeping guns for protection against crime.It’s possible that Cambridge tapped other data sources, including what Cruz’s campaign app collected. Facebook declined to provide officials for interview and didn’t immediately respond to requests for information beyond its statements Friday and Monday. Cambridge also didn’t immediately respond to emailed questions.Facebook makes it easy for advertisers to target users based on nuanced information about them. Facebook’s mapping of the “social graph”—essentially the web of people’s real-life connections—is also invaluable for marketers.For example, researchers can look at people’s clusters of friends and get good insight as to who is important and influential, said Jonathan Albright, research director at the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University. People who bridge different friend networks, for example, can have more influence when they post something, making them prime for targeting.The Pew Research Center said two-thirds of Americans get at least some of their news on social media, according on Pew Research Center. While people don’t exist in a Facebook-only vacuum, it is possible that bogus information users saw on the site could later be reinforced by the “rabbit hole” of clicks and conspiracy sites on the broader internet, as Wylie described. Citation: How Facebook likes could profile voters for manipulation (2018, March 19) retrieved 18 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-03-facebook-profile-voters.html This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. © 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This Jan. 17, 2017, file photo shows a Facebook logo being displayed in a start-up companies gathering at Paris’ Station F, in Paris. A former employee of a Trump-affiliated data-mining firm says it used algorithms that “took fake news to the next level” using data inappropriately obtained from Facebook. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus, File) Explore further The social network is now under fire after The New York Times and The Guardian newspaper reported that former Trump campaign consultant Cambridge Analytica used data inappropriately obtained from roughly 50 million Facebook users to try to influence elections. Among that information were users’ likes.Facebook stock plunged 7 percent in trading Monday. The head of the EU parliament has promised an investigation. U.S. congressional members and Connecticut’s attorney general are seeking testimony or written responses. After two years of failing to disclose the harvesting, Facebook said Monday that it hired an outside firm to audit Cambridge Analytica and its activities.What’s not clear, though, is exactly how effective Cambridge’s techniques are.Researchers in a 2013 study found that Facebook likes on hobbies, interests and other attributes can predict a lot about people, including sexual orientation and political affiliation. Computers analyze the data to look for patterns that might not be obvious, such as curly fries pointing to higher intelligence.Chris Wylie, a Cambridge co-founder who left in 2014, said the firm used such techniques to learn about individuals and create an information cocoon to change their perceptions. In doing so, he said, the firm “took fake news to the next level.””This is based on an idea called ‘informational dominance,’ which is the idea that if you can capture every channel of information around a person and then inject content around them, you can change their perception of what’s actually happening,” Wylie said Monday on NBC’s “Today.”Late Friday, Facebook said Cambridge improperly obtained information from 270,000 people who downloaded an app described as a personality test. Those people agreed to share data with the app for research—not for political targeting. And the data included who their Facebook friends were and what they liked—even though those friends hadn’t downloaded the app or given explicit consent.During the 2016 presidential elections, Cambridge worked both for the primary campaign of Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and President Donald Trump’s general-election campaign. Trump’s campaign paid Cambridge more than $6 million, according to federal election records, although officials have more recently played down that work.