James' World 2

Click the link below the picture

.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Despite the concerns career prosecutors raised about the case, Mr. Trump’s inexperienced handpicked choice to lead the prosecutors’ office, Lindsey Halligan, secured an indictment against Ms. James last week, accusing her of mortgage fraud. The indictment said Ms. James had falsely claimed in loan documents that she would use a home she had purchased in Norfolk, Va., as a secondary residence, but instead had used it as a rental property, allowing her to receive favorable terms that saved her close to $19,000.

The firings of Ms. Yusi and Ms. Bird came less than a month after Ms. Halligan’s predecessor, Erik S. Siebert, resigned under pressure from Mr. Trump. Mr. Siebert, who had been chosen by the president to run the office, had taken a stand against his desire to seek charges against another of his adversaries: James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director.

In the end, Ms. Halligan did Mr. Trump’s bidding in that case, too, personally presenting a case to a grand jury last month and securing an indictment against Mr. Comey that accused him of lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding.

The U.S. attorney’s office in the Eastern District of Virginia, which has traditionally handled some of the country’s most significant terrorism and national security cases, has been battered by dismissals and resignations, stemming from the cases against Ms. James and Mr. Comey. Ms. James and Mr. Comey have both denied the charges against them.

Maya Song, the office’s former first assistant U.S. attorney, was fired in the wake of Mr. Comey’s indictment, as was her replacement, Maggie Cleary, a well-known conservative lawyer in Virginia.

Mr. Comey’s son-in-law, Troy Edwards Jr., who handled national security cases, resigned in protest shortly after the indictment was returned. And Mr. Edwards’s boss, Michael P. Ben’Ary, was dismissed after a pro-Trump social media influencer wrongly accused him in an online post of having questioned the indictment of Mr. Comey.

.

President Trump’s handpicked acting U.S. attorney, Lindsey Halligan, secured an indictment against the New York attorney general last week after other prosecutors resisted seeking charges. Credit…Evan Vucci/Associated Press

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The West Coast of North America is a geologically tumultuous zone where tectonic plates collide, subducting under and scraping past one another. Over the eons, this activity has regularly caused major earthquakes. New research reveals that some of these seismic events may have happened in sync along the coast’s two major faults: the San Andreas Fault and the Cascadia Subduction Zone.

A team of researchers analyzed a trove of seafloor sediment from the region where the faults meet off the coast of northern California. The researchers’ findings, published recently in Geosphere, reveal that the fault systems have produced several synchronized earthquakes over the past 3,000 years.

Chris Goldfinger, an Oregon State University marine geologist and lead author of the new paper, compares the process to tuning an analog radio, in which the device’s oscillators are synced up to convert incoming signals. “When you tune an old radio, you’re essentially causing one oscillator to vibrate at the same frequency as the other one,” he says. “When these faults synchronize, one fault could tune up the other and cause earthquakes in pairs.”

The Cascadia Subduction Zone, where the Juan de Fuca and Gorda plates slide underneath the North American Plate, stretches all the way from Vancouver Island to northern California to meet the San Andreas Fault. That fault extends south for 750 miles along a boundary where the North American and Pacific plates slide past each other.

Since 1999, Goldfinger and his team have been drilling into the seafloor at this tectonic crossroads, known as the Mendocino Triple Junction, to pull up cores that show a cross-section of the sediments that have built up there. For the new study, the researchers examined more than 130 sediment cores that record roughly 3,000 years of geological history. Many of the cores contained layered sediments known as turbidites, which are created by marine landslides that move large amounts of material around the ocean floor. Many of these landslides are caused by earthquakes, making turbidite layers a useful proxy for pinpointing past seismic events.

Most turbidites have coarser sediment layers at the bottom and finer silt-like sediment at the top, similar to what you get when you swirl a bucket of sand at the beach. But the turbidites in samples from the Mendocino Triple Junction “seem to be upside down with all the sand at the top,” Goldfinger says. “And as far as we know, gravity hasn’t changed.”

As they investigated the puzzling features, Goldfinger realized the cores contained two turbidites stacked on top of each other. This provides evidence of two separate earthquake events happening in quick succession—as the first earthquake was settling a layer of silt over the ocean floor, a second shock sent another avalanche of sand over top.

Some of the layered turbidites are so closely spaced that these events could have happened anywhere from within minutes to decades of each other. Analysis of the ages of shells in the sediments suggest there were at least eight large earthquakes along the San Andreas Fault over the past 3,000 years that occurred within decades of significant quakes along the Cascadia Subduction Zone.

Meng Wei, a marine geologist and geophysicist at the University of Rhode Island, says the idea that fault systems near each other could synchronize has been floating around for years and has been seen at smaller fault boundaries over short periods. But he says the new paper is impressive for illustrating that the phenomenon is possible with larger fault systems over thousands of years.

Though the Cascadia and San Andreas systems have apparently been linked for millennia, there seems to be some variability when it comes to the timing between successive quakes. Wei, who was not involved in the new study, says it is possible that the two faults could produce shaking within a few years of each other at some point in the future, but more research is needed to gauge how one quake triggers another. “Even if these two faults are synchro, the time interval between earthquakes can still be decades,” he adds.

The two systems are also not in perfect sync. The team discovered that some temblors, including the 1906 earthquake that devastated San Francisco, were one-off events that were caused exclusively by movements along the northern San Andreas Fault.

.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

From

Click the link below the picture

.

Weddings are beautiful. And as beautiful as they are, they are also expensive. 

And while I still haven’t quite made my way down the aisle just yet, let’s say I’ve made my way through my fair share of weddings (as a bridesmaid in at least six, in fact). So I’ve seen some of the most grandiose of weddings, and also when couples decided to scale back. And almost in every instance, it’s been my friends who decided to be a bit more frugal (and use the money to invest in other ways), who have revealed being happy with the decision they made. While some of the others were kicking themselves for things they later thought just weren’t worth it.

It makes complete sense. In 2025, the national average cost of a wedding in the U.S. is hovering around $36,000. And that’s the national average. Because couples that I know in major cities such as New York, D.C., Atlanta and San Francisco have spent three and four times as much as that amount. For many couples, that’s a price tag that causes second thoughts: what if that same money went into something more lasting?

So what are we seeing happen? Well, more and more Black couples are choosing to redirect what would have been their wedding budget into buying a home. For some, that means opting for a modest courthouse ceremony and skipping the reception altogether. For others, it’s about scaling down a traditional wedding—maybe hosting a backyard gathering or an intimate dinner—so they can put tens of thousands toward a down payment instead. However it looks, the choice shows a growing sentiment that wealth-building should come before extravagance. And in this economy, when you sit and think about it, can you really blame them?

Weddings vs. Down Payments

The numbers make this decision easier to justify. A wedding that costs $36,000 is roughly equal to a nine percent down payment on a $400,000 home, the current median price in many U.S. markets. According to Bankrate, first-time homebuyers in 2024 put down a median of nine percent of a home’s purchase price. That means a wedding budget could realistically unlock the front door to a couple’s first home.

Wedding costs, meanwhile, continue to climb. And with the average income needed to buy a home increasing year after year, it can almost seem frivolous to put so much towards one day, when many can’t afford basic living expenses. So much so, that it’s painful to really even think about it if you’re a 2025 or 2026 bride. Inflation has hit everything from catering to floral design, and planners say couples can expect to pay more now than just five years ago. The “wedding tax”—the premium vendors add for bridal services—only widens the gap. Many couples leave the experience not just newly married but also newly indebted, with credit card balances or loans that linger far beyond the honeymoon. For Black couples, who already contend with systemic barriers to wealth-building, that kind of debt isn’t something we can afford to take on.

Closing The Gap

The racial wealth gap in America remains depressing, and homeownership is one of the clearest indicators of it. The National Association of Realtors reported that the Black homeownership rate in 2023 was just 44 percent, compared to 73 percent for White households. That nearly 30-point difference reflects decades of discriminatory lending practices, redlining, and unequal access to mortgage credit. But buying property is closing a generational gap that has kept Black families from accessing the same wealth-building opportunities as our White peers.

Encouragingly, the tide is shifting. In 2024, 62 percent of Black buyers were purchasing their first home, according to National Mortgage Professional. That’s a higher share than the overall first-time buyer market. It shows a determination among Black couples to prioritize ownership even if it means challenging cultural expectations around weddings. Skipping the traditional big day may raise eyebrows among family or friends, but for many couples, the long-term benefits outweigh the short-term optics.

Redefining Black Love

While the financial logic is clear, this trend is also cultural. Weddings have long been positioned as the ultimate milestone, especially in communities where public celebrations of love carry deep significance. The dress, the cake, and the first dance are rituals passed down across generations. Social media has amplified the pressure, with Instagram and TikTok serving as highlight reels of elaborate receptions (if you haven’t already been on #WeddingTok, save yourself and don’t get on that side — it can really warp your perception of how much weddings really cost). But as costs soar and economic realities shift, thankfully many Black couples are rewriting the narrative. They are showing that intimacy, stability, and shared vision can matter more than spectacle, and that’s really how it should be.

.

Portrait of young couple in front of their home

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

In Mr. Trump’s case, he was accused of storing boxes with classified information in various insecure locations at Mar-a-Lago, including a bathroom and a ballroom stage. Because Mar-a-Lago is a club and not just a residence, many people could have gained access to the documents before the F.B.I. finally retrieved them in August 2022.

In Mr. Bolton’s case, he was accused of transmitting the entries using personal email accounts and an encrypted consumer messaging app that were not approved for sending and storing classified information. One of the email accounts was apparently hacked by Iran in 2021, the indictment said. And while his house had an approved facility for storing classified information while he was Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, it did not have one afterward.

Both faced multiple counts of unauthorized retention.

The charges in the two indictments substantially overlap in one respect: Both men were charged with multiple counts of unauthorized retention of national defense information under Section 793(e) of Title 10 of the United States Code, part of a law known as the Espionage Act.

In both cases, prosecutors picked a subset of the files recovered from the men’s homes during court-authorized searches — presumably, documents that were sensitive enough to impress a jury, but not so sensitive that it would be risky to discuss them in court — and brought a count based on each. Mr. Trump was charged with 38 such counts, and Mr. Bolton with eight.

The indictments used their past statements against them.

The indictments against both men cited their own public statements criticizing others for mishandling classified information, to underscore that they knew what they were doing was wrong.

In Mr. Trump’s case, the indictment cited numerous statements he made during the 2016 presidential campaign about the need to vigorously enforce laws meant to protect classified information. At the time, Mr. Trump was using that issue to attack his rival, Hillary Clinton, for having used a private email server while secretary of state.

In Mr. Bolton’s case, the indictment quoted extensively from comments he made in the spring of 2025 criticizing Trump administration officials who had discussed plans for an upcoming military strike in Yemen on the consumer app Signal, in a group chat that mistakenly included a journalist. Notably, the Justice Department under Mr. Trump did not treat that incident as a crime.

Only Trump was charged with obstruction offenses.

The charges in the two cases significantly diverged in another respect. Each man was charged with a set of offenses that the other did not face.

In Mr. Trump’s case, his obstruction of efforts to retrieve files — including allegations that he caused a false statement to be made to law enforcement agents and conspired to conceal files from them — was a major part of his case. He faced eight additional charges that derived from that alleged behavior, which the indictment documented at length.

Mr. Bolton’s indictment chided him for not telling the F.B.I. that he still possessed classified information when he reported that an apparent Iranian hacker had broken into his email account in 2021. But it did not charge him with obstruction.

.

John R. Bolton, the former White House national security adviser, in 2019 at the White House.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Alzheimer’s disease is characterized by certain key changes in the brain. Among them are the development of two kinds of protein deposits: clumps made up of amyloid beta and tangles of tau.

These changes can be identified in a few ways. Medical professionals and scientists can see the extent of these protein deposits in the brain using sophisticated and expensive neuroimaging. Another diagnostic option involves measuring amyloid beta and certain modified forms of tau in the cerebrospinal fluid that surrounds the brain and spinal cord, but collecting this fluid requires a lumbar puncture, which many people find too invasive.

A newly approved test measures levels of amyloid beta and pTau217, an altered version of tau that is one of the markers of Alzheimer’s disease, in a blood sample. From the time this particular marker was identified, researchers realized it could help detect “preclinical Alzheimer’s disease,” that is, the presence of amyloid beta brain pathology prior to any symptoms. But in a twist, scientists are finding this protein marker of neurodegeneration in unexpected places.

A new study in the journal Brain Communications reports that pTau217 is elevated among healthy newborns. In fact, these infants had higher levels than people with Alzheimer’s disease. This discovery indicates that the protein changes that characterize this devastating disorder are reversible in certain circumstances—hinting at new possibilities for treatment.

Normal tau protein is involved in binding and stabilizing the network of proteins that give a neuron its structure. Tau molecules can attach to phosphate groups (molecules made up of oxygen and phosphorus) through a process called phosphorylation. When that happens, the neuronal structure that tau supports can destabilize in ways that contribute to the formation of tangles. In fact, pTau217 is a tau molecule that has undergone phosphorylation at a position that scientists call 217.

In the new study, an international research team measured levels of pTau217 in blood samples from two groups of healthy newborns and compared them with levels found in teenagers, adults aged 18 to 25, and seniors aged 70 to 77. None of these study participants reported any cognitive difficulties or showed any impairments when tested. Although there were no significant differences in the modified tau levels between the teenage and adult subjects, the newborns had pTau217 levels that were more than five times higher than those of the older groups.

The research team also tested blood samples from “extremely preterm” infants, meaning babies born before 28 weeks of gestation, following up with the infants over the course of 40 weeks. In many cases, these children had even higher levels of blood pTau217 than babies born at the expected delivery date. Levels of pTau217 appeared to decrease as both preterm infants grew older and, by about 20 weeks after birth, reached the levels found among healthy young adults.

To compare infants with people with Alzheimer’s disease, the researchers tested an additional cohort for pTau217. Some people in this group had Alzheimer’s dementia, others had what is called mild cognitive impairment of the Alzheimer’s type (which is sometimes a precursor to the disease), while another group with no evidence of dementia or cognitive decline served as a control. All the diagnoses in this set of participants were confirmed with the invasive lumbar procedure and cognitive testing. The researchers found that people with either mild cognitive impairment or dementia had pTau217 levels that were higher than otherwise healthy adults but were still less than half of what was found among healthy newborns.

In addition, the team discovered that plasma total tau—not just the modified pTau217 form—was elevated in newborns. This is consistent with earlier studies showing high levels of total tau in fetal brains with peak levels at around four to five months of gestation and then decreasing two-fold by the sixth month after birth.

Assessments of other proteins provided nuance. For example, the researchers also found lower levels of amyloid beta in blood samples from healthy newborns than in older study participants. And, curiously, a protein called neurofilament light chain, often linked to brain injury, was elevated in newborns compared with teens and adults—but not as high as what was found in elderly people. That last finding in babies may be explained by developmental processes in the newborn brain and by cranial compression during birth, which, especially in the case of vaginal delivery, leads to increased levels of that protein.

These findings are remarkable given the close association between pTau217 and the amyloid beta pathology of Alzheimer’s disease. Researchers have also seen elevated pTau217 in people with a few rare neurological diseases, including Creutzfeld-Jakob disease, Niemann-Pick disease type C, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (better known as Lou Gehrig’s disease or ALS). In addition, a specific mutation in the tau gene increases pTau217 levels. Although this is the first time elevations of the Alzheimer’s disease marker pTau217 have been observed in newborns, extensive phosphorylation of tau has previously been reported in the developing brain. Significantly, there is no evidence that the same tangles arise in a fetus or newborn despite the occurrence of similarly modified tau proteins.

In addition to modifications of the Tau protein, such as phosphorylation, there are also several known forms of the molecule (isoforms) which differ from one another by the inclusion or exclusion of specific stretches of protein sequence. The adult brain typically has six isoforms of tau, but the fetus has a distinct fetal isoform that may support important processes during development. It’s possible fetal tau is somehow protective or resilient in ways that allow baby brains to avoid the formation of tangles linked to toxic outcomes in older adults.

This study cannot fully determine that point, however, in part because the methods used do not discriminate between fetal tau and other isoforms—more research will be needed to explore that possibility.

.

SanyaSM/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The United States Chamber of Commerce sued the Trump administration on Thursday over the new $100,000 fee for H-1B visas.

The lawsuit said the fee, which President Donald Trump put in place with an executive order last month, was “unlawful” and that it would harm American businesses.”The United States is unique in its ability to attract the brightest talent from across the globe. For more than 70 years, what is now known as the H-1B visa program has enabled the United States to harness this magnetic draw,” the lawsuit said, adding that as a result of the new fee, businesses would have to “dramatically increase their labor costs or hire fewer highly skilled employees for whom domestic replacements are not readily available.”

It also argues that the executive order is unlawful because it “blatantly contravenes the fees Congress has set for the H-1B program.”

The lawsuit pits the business association against Trump, who has fashioned himself as a pro-business president.

The White House and the Chamber of Commerce did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

.

Trump signed an executive order adding the $100,000 fee to H-1B visas.  Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

“The U.S. now has to face up to the fact it has an adversary which can threaten substantial parts of the U.S. economy,” said Henry Farrell, a political scientist at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. The United States and China are now very clearly “in a much more delicate stage of mutual interdependence,” he added.

“China has really begun to figure out how to take a leaf from the U.S. playbook and, in a certain sense, play that game better than the U.S. is currently playing it,” Mr. Farrell said.

China’s move has rekindled tensions between the world’s two largest economies, with Mr. Trump threatening to increase already substantial tariffs on Chinese imports by imposing an additional 100 percent tax on Nov. 1 unless Beijing backs down from its new restrictions.

The type of supply chain restriction that China is embarking on first came into play in 2020. Washington dusted off an obscure provision known as the foreign direct product rule to target the Chinese tech giant Huawei, which the U.S. government considered a national security threat. But instead of restricting American technology exports just to Huawei, the United States said any company anywhere in the world could not ship a product to Huawei if it contained U.S. parts or was made with U.S. equipment or software.

Because of the United States’ key role in the global chipmaking industry, the rules basically encompassed all advanced technology. It was a broad exertion of U.S. economic power that became the basis of a series of global tech rules during the Biden administration. Although foreign governments chafed at being told what to do, many cooperated for fear of being cut off from U.S. technology.

The question now is: Will the Chinese restrictions persuade the Trump administration to walk back its tariffs or longstanding technology restrictions, or will China’s government fold under pressure first?

The administration seemed caught off guard by China’s restrictions, which could cripple American industries. Mr. Trump threatened on Friday to cancel a planned meeting with the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, as well as adding a 100 percent tariff. After stock markets plunged, the president posted on social media on Sunday, “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine!”

On Tuesday, Mr. Trump renewed his barbs, telling a crowd of reporters and the president of Argentina that Mr. Xi “gets testy because China likes to take advantage of people and they can’t take advantage of us.” That afternoon, Mr. Trump wrote on social media that the United States was considering terminating cooking oil imports from China, as well as potentially other business.

On Wednesday morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade representative, described the Chinese licensing system as a global power grab and said the United States stood ready to impose its tariffs if China moved forward.

.

President Trump has threatened to cancel a meeting with China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, who spoke at the Global Leaders’ Meeting on Women in Beijing on Monday.Credit…Pool photo by Ken Ishii

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

In 2006, immunologist and 2025 Nobel prize winner Shimon Sakaguchi co-wrote an article in Scientific American that now feels prophetic. In the story, entitled “Peacekeepers of the Immune System,” Sakaguchi traced a time line of important studies that led to his discovery of an elusive type of immune cell he called regulatory T cells.

In the 1980s, the field had largely dismissed the existence of such a class of cells, but Sakaguchi and other scientists proved that regulatory T cells, or Tregs, are the integral “peacekeepers” that prevent the immune system from overreacting and harming the body itself. That process, known as peripheral immune tolerance, stops the body’s primary defense mechanism from entering self-destruct mode, called autoimmunity.

The experiments Sakaguchi cataloged in Scientific American nearly 20 years ago were recognized last week at the 2025 Nobel award ceremony in Stockholm, where he and immunologists Mary E. Brunkow and Fred Ramsdell shared the prize in physiology or medicine for their discoveries.

“I didn’t expect it, and of course, I was very much pleased,” Sakaguchi says. “I’m happy to have this honor. But at the same time, I really appreciate the community of scientists who have worked together. The progress of this field is really due to the collective effort of many scientists and immunologists.”

In an exclusive interview, Scientific American caught up with Sakaguchi on October 7 EDT, the day after the award announcement. He discussed the crucial findings that led to the discovery of regulatory T cells and clinical trials that harness these cells to potentially treat chronic infections, cancer, and autoimmune diseases.

What was your journey into looking for cells that suppressed the immune system? What drew you to them?

I was very much interested in autoimmune diseases because our immune system normally defends our cells from invading microbes—viruses and bacteria—but sometimes it’s aggressive and destroys our body cells and causes autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and type 1 diabetes. So the immune system has two aspects: good and bad. What’s the mechanism behind this? If we can understand that mechanism, we may be able to treat autoimmune diseases, or the opposite: make the immune system attack abnormal cells, such as cancer cells, arising in our body.

That was my interest when I was a student in medical school, and then I became a researcher to tackle this conundrum. At that time [in the 1980s], the only available approach to study autoimmunity was the mouse model. I happened to find that newborn mice, if you remove the thymus [an organ in the chest that produces various types of T cells], they spontaneously develop autoimmunelike diseases. And then what was interesting was: if you inoculate the thymus-free mice with normal T cells from nonaffected adult mice, you can prevent disease development—meaning that in the normal collection of T cells in the thymus, there must be some cells that can prevent or suppress disease development. That was the start of my research career.

What convinced you that regulatory T cells existed when others abandoned the theory?

I was convinced that autoimmune diseases, similar to [how they can arise] in humans, can be produced in healthy animals by just manipulating the immune system, removing certain T cells. That was always a very solid phenomenon for me. If other hypotheses or other ideas could explain what we saw, I would follow that concept or idea. I always compared what I believed and what [other theories] showed—which one had better explanatory powers. Our results were not so bad—and were even better—so that was the reason that I continued my research on regulatory T cells. It is really a key issue in modern immunology: How can we realize or understand why the immune system does not react with ourselves?

In 2006, you wrote an article for Scientific American entitled “Peacekeepers of the Immune System.” How did you come up with the name “peacekeepers” for the cells?

That was coined by my colleague and co-author of that article, Zoltan Fehervari—he’s now an editor of Nature. At that time, we talked about how we can name them and make them more relatable. And then he came up with that idea: “peacekeeper.” It was a really nice name because, later on, we gradually realized that regulatory T cells not only are immunosuppressive but also have various other functions, such as promoting tissue repair. So they are peacekeepers for many things.

You essentially documented in the article how pivotal this work was nearly two decades ago. Did you think back then that your research would be recognized for a Nobel Prize?

Actually, I didn’t. I really hoped that we could have a better understanding of immunological self-tolerance. It’s a long-standing, important question in immunology. Even the 1960 Nobel awards were awarded to Peter Medawar and Frank Macfarlane Burnet, who showed that immune tolerance is acquired, not innate. Well, that’s really interesting, but how does it happen? There have been several theories, including clonal deletion: deleting the dangerous self-reactive clones [of T cells]. They are eliminated when they are immature and being produced in the immune system. But that couldn’t explain how usual autoimmune diseases happen—for example, type 1 diabetes or rheumatoid arthritis. So it is really a key issue in modern immunology: How can we realize or understand why the immune system does not react with ourselves?

Are there any therapies or applications of your work that are close to making it to the clinic?

What is fascinating about regulatory T cells is that they are specialized for immune suppression, and so this means that if you strengthen their functions or increase their numbers, it could be a good way to treat autoimmunity or allergies, or various diseases. On the other hand, if you reduce the number of these cells or make their function weaker, then the immune response can be enhanced. So it could be good for cancer immunity. We are pursuing both directions, our team and many others. There are many, many trials underway—at the Nobel announcement, the chairperson told us that more than 200 clinical trials are ongoing now.

.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Hmmmm… So this is the land of the free!

Click the link below the picture

.

As the agents left, they released tear gas, apparently without warning, sending people coughing and running for cover. Among those affected by the gas were 13 Chicago Police Department officers, the police department said, and at least one officer was seen rinsing his eyes out with water from a neighbor’s garden hose.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security said that the federal agents were conducting an immigration enforcement operation when two people tried to flee and hit the agents’ vehicle.

“This incident is not isolated and reflects a growing and dangerous trend of illegal aliens violently resisting arrest and agitators and criminals ramming cars into our law enforcement officers,” the D.H.S. said in a statement. The statement said that federal agents used “crowd control measures” after a group of people gathered and turned hostile.

It was one of many turbulent episodes to erupt in Chicago in recent days. Federal agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol have roamed the city and suburbs, making arrests, often pulling up to people walking along sidewalks, stopping them, and questioning them.

The agents repeatedly have been observed releasing smoke bombs, tear gas, and pepper balls to disperse residents who gather or capture videos on cellphones, including when the agents were making arrests in densely populated neighborhoods. Chicago police officers, who have been called to the scenes of some clashes, have been exposed to tear gas from federal agents twice in the last two weeks.

As the intensity of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown has risen, residents of Chicago are increasingly pushing back with fury.

In the last several weeks, Chicagoans have formed volunteer groups to monitor their neighborhoods for federal immigration agents, posting alerts on Facebook and in Signal group chats when agents are seen.

If agents are spotted on the street, motorists lean on their horns as a warning and sometimes give chase. Around the city last weekend, pairs of volunteers were seen with orange whistles around their necks, blowing the whistles at the first sight of immigration agents.

One Chicago resident, Chris Molitor, stationed himself on a street corner on the North Side on Tuesday, holding a sign denouncing President Trump and wearing a shirt critical of ICE.

“We’re seeing videos of people being abused,” said Mr. Molitor, 64, who works in hospitality, nodding in the direction of a local taqueria whose owners were questioned by ICE. “There’s got to be a pushback of some kind.”

Smoke filled the air after federal agents used tear gas during a clash with community members on the far South Side.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________