Jump to content

User:Chrisvls/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Electoral Count Act The Electoral Count Act of 1887 (Pub. L. 49–90, 24 Stat. 373, later codified at Title 3, Chapter 1[1]) is a United States federal law establishing procedures for the counting of electoral votes by Congress following a presidential election. The law was enacted ten years after the disputed 1876 presidential election, in which several states submitted competing slates of electors. A divided Congress was unable to resolve the deadlock for weeks and fashioned a special Electoral Commission to resolve the dispute. Elections in 1880 and 1884 again saw close results and again raised the possibility of an electoral dispute coming to Congress — or of partisans in Congress using the counting process to overturn the result.[2] Finally, after years of discussion, Congress passed the Act in 1887 and has followed the Act's procedures since then.

In order to minimize Congressional and partisan involvement in electoral disputes, the Act places the primary responsibility to resolve election disputes upon the states. The Act sets out procedures and deadline for the states to follow in resolving disputes, certifying results, and sending them to Congress. The Act then minimizes Congress' role further, saying that the "final determination" as certified by the governor of the states "shall govern." This essentially relegates Congress to resolving only a narrow class of disputes, such as if a governor has certified two different slates of electors, if a state fails to certify its results under the Act's procedures, or if the certified electors' votes were not "properly given."

It also sets standards and a timeline for the states to do so. For example, the states must resolve disputes using rules that were already in place before the election started. The Act also sets out a specific timeline and procedures for resolving disputes, certifying the results, and transmit the results to Congress.

and rthese disputes are established before the start of the election.

he Act first gives the states the responsibility of completing recounts, assessing election contests, and resolving other election disputes or litigation.

actors in Congress from assigns states the duty of resolving election contests, recounts, and similar investigations.

The law has been criticized since it was enacted, with an early commenter describing it as "very confused, almost unintelligible."[3]: 643  Modern commenters have stated that the law "invites misinterpretation," observing that it is "turgid and repetitious" and that "[i]ts central provisions seem contradictory."[4]: 543 


The central provisions of the law have not been seriously tested in a disputed election, the closest approach being in the contentious 2000 presidential election, which was ultimately resolved before the electors cast their votes. However, the law's timing provisions did play a role in court decisions, such as Bush v. Gore, regarding that election.




Daily Mail Deprecation

Multiple health/medical articles that don't exaggerate, they outright fabricate things that the underlying studies did not claim.[1]

Multiple articles on sensational subjects that are other sources do not find notable. A woman owns a dumb horse [2]. A woman claims her boyfriend is cheating on her during her birthday toast [3]. A woman has such a washboard stomach she didn't notice she was pregnant, until a midwife moved the baby and instantly revealed a baby bump.[4] Stacy, whose surname is unknown, got a third nose surgery and is finally happy with how it looks, despite being warned it could turn black and die. [5]

Multiple articles containing extremely dangerous BLP material. Quoting the unnamed boyfriend of an ex-girlfriend of a man "has has not been ruled out" in the disappearance of his wife, saying the potential suspect cheated on her while she was in hospital, with no discernible fact checking.[6]

Generally unreliable --

Beyond unreliable -- knowingly spreading falsehoods or seemingly indifferent to the requirements of verifying what they publish, such as posting ludicrous claims based on single anonymous sources, track record of these turning out to be false

Frequently cited and discussed -- the purpose of the edit filter is not to erect a new standard, it is to prevent the waste of time and goodwill of re-hashing the discussion, both in articles and on the noticeboard

Giving ludicrous or fringe or conspiracy theories notability that they would not receive from reliable sources that would easily uncover the unreliability of the proffered view. Saying "ISS is hiding aliens, says UFO group" may be correct -- the group did say that -- but a reliable source would not have published the piece

Replaceable

May not be always incorrect, but better to find other sources than guess if this is one of the correct ones

There may be reasonable exceptions, primarily for SELF


Mehmet Oz

Mehmet Cengiz Öz (Turkish: [mehˈmet dʒeɲˈɟiz øz]; born June 11, 1960), known professionally as Dr. Oz, is a Turkish-American television personality, cardiothoracic surgeon, university professor, and author. Before his televsion career, Oz distinguished himself as a highly regarded cardiology and transplant surgeon, serving as professor and vice chairman of the surgery department at Columbia and New York-Presbyterian Hospital for more than twenty years.{newyorker} In 2003, he became host of his own television show on the Discovery Network, later moving to The Oprah Winfrey Network. His presentation of health issues was recognized as compelling and accessible, earning him fame, two Emmys, and nearly four million daily viewers by 2013.

But he has been widely criticized the medical and wider community for promoting and profiting from health advice that is unsupported by evidence, contradicted by evidence, or non-scientific in nature.

Oz has promoted pseudoscience and alternative medicine, and has been criticized by physicians, government officials, and publications, including in the British Medical Journal, Popular Science, and The New Yorker, for endorsing unproven products and non-scientific advice. In Xxxx, the BMJ surveyed claims made on his show and found that only X percent were supported by "believable" evidence, only X percent were supported by any evidence, and X percent were contradicted by evidence. The BMJ study also found that Dr. Oz frequently praised products that were advertised on the show, but rarely mentioned this arrangement to viewers. In a hearing in the U.S. Senate, Sen. Claire MacCakill said that some of Dr. Oz's recommendations were so far outside the medical something that "monolithic".

Trevor Bedford

Trevor Bedford is an American computational biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Institute. His research focuses on tools to speed the process of using genomic sequencing data to map the evolutionary trees of pathogens -- and thus yield insights into geographic spread, epidemic growth rate, and vaccine efficacy. In 2015, Bedford co-developed NextFlu, later renamed Nextstrain, an open source system for computing viral evolutionary trees from sequencing data. In 2020, Bedford was able to use data from the Flu Tracking Project and Nextstrain to first document community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States. In 2021, his work was recognized






Some zika stuff

As early as August 2014, physicians in Natal in northeatern Brazil began to investigate an outbreak of illness characterized by a flat pinkish rash, bloodshot eyes, fever, joint pain and headaches.[5] While the symptoms resembled Dengue fever, testing ruled out Dengue and several other potential causes.[5] By March 2015, the illness had spread to Salvador, Bahia and had appeared in three different states.[5] Then, in May 2015, researchers from the Federal University of Bahia determined, using the RT-PCR technique, that the illness was an outbreak of Zika virus.[6][7]

Prior to these reports, Zika had not been detected in the Americas; indeed, until 2007, reports of Zika were rare.[8] Prior to an outbreak in Micronesia in 2007, only 14 cases of Zika virus had been reported and none outside of Asia and Africa.[8] [9]

Researchers generally believe the virus was brought to Brazil by an infected traveler, who was then bitten by a mosquito that then infected others, but the precise event that brought the virus to Brazil is uncertain.[10][11] Researchers have hypothesized that the virus may have entered Brazil during a major sporting event that brought a large number of international travelers to the country.[10][11] The virus may have arrived during the World Cup, which brought millions of visitors from around the world.[10][11] Alternatively, researchers have suggested an international canoeing event as another potential source. The 2014 Va'a [World Sprints|http://www.worldsprints.com/2014-brazil.html], a Polynesian canoeing championship, brought competitors from from several regions, including French Polynesia, where a Zika outbreak in Oceania began in 2013.[12] The true number of Zika cases was estimated at more than 30,000.[13]

Regardless of the initial transmission event, Zika may have spread along the same route as chikungunya, which was also first discovered in Africe and Asia, then travelled to Oceania before spreading to the Americas. [14]Phylogenetic analysis of the first Brazilian infections strongly indicated that the circulating virus is the Asian, rather than African, subtype of the virus.[14]

  1. ^ Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives, Positive Law Codification, visited Aug. 4, 2020.
  2. ^ Foley, Edward,. Ballot battles : the history of disputed elections in the United States. New York. p. 153. ISBN 978-0-19-023528-4. OCLC 928386780.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  3. ^ Burgess, John W. (1888). "The Law of the Electoral Count". Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 5. p. 633.
  4. ^ Siegel, Stephen A. (2004). "The Conscientious Congressman's Guide to the Electoral Count Act of 1887" (PDF). Florida Law Review. Vol. 56. p. 541.
  5. ^ a b c McNeil, Jr., Donald G.; Romero, Simon; Tavernise, Sabrina (6 February 2016). "How a Medical Mystery in Brazil Led Doctors to Zika". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 February 2016.
  6. ^ "Identificado vírus causador de doença misteriosa em Salvador e RMS – notícias em Bahia". Bahia (in Portuguese). São Paulo. 29 April 2015.
  7. ^ "Zika virus – Brazil: confirmed". Pro-MED-mail. International Society for Infectious Diseases. 19 May 2015.
  8. ^ a b Duffy, Mark R.; et al. (11 June 2009). "Zika virus outbreak on Yap Islands, Federated States of Micronesia". The New England Journal of Medicine. 360 (24): 2536–2543. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0805715. PMID 19516034.
  9. ^ Hayes, Edward B. (September 2009). "Zika virus outside Africa". Emerging Infectious Diseases. 15 (9). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: 1347–1350. doi:10.3201/eid1509.090442. ISSN 1080-6059. PMC 2819875. PMID 19788800.
  10. ^ a b c Romero, Simon (29 January 2016). "Tears and Bewilderment in Brazilian City Facing Zika Crisis". The New York Times. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  11. ^ a b c Murthy, Dr. Bhavini (28 January 2016). "Zika Virus Outbreak May Be Linked to Major Sporting Events". ABC News. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  12. ^ Cite error: The named reference eurosurveillance1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  13. ^ Berger, Stephen (3 February 2015). Chikungunya and Zika: Global Status (2015 ed.). GIDEON Informatics, Inc. p. 75. ISBN 9781498806978. Retrieved 4 February 2016.
  14. ^ a b Musso, D; Cao-Lormeau, VM; Gubler, DJ (18 July 2015). "Zika virus: following the path of dengue and chikungunya?". Lancet. 386 (9990): 243–4. PMID 26194519.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Chrisvls/sandbox&oldid=1063386481"