People have more empathy for battered puppies and full grown dogs than they do for some humans -- adults, but not children, finds new research to be presented at the 108th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association.

 "Contrary to popular thinking, we are not necessarily more disturbed by animal rather than human suffering," said Jack Levin, the Irving and Betty Brudnick Professor of Sociology and Criminology at Northeastern University. "Our results indicate a much more complex situation with respect to the age and species of victims, with age being the more important component. The fact that adult human crime victims receive less empathy than do child, puppy, and full grown dog victims suggests that adult dogs are regarded as dependent and vulnerable not unlike their younger canine counterparts and kids."

 In their study, Levin and co-author Arnold Arluke, a sociology professor at Northeastern University, considered the opinions of 240 men and women, most of whom were white and between the ages of 18-25, at a large northeastern university. Participants randomly received one of four fictional news articles about the beating of a one-year-old child, an adult in his thirties, a puppy, or a 6-year-old dog. The stories were identical except for the victim's identify. After reading their story, respondents were asked to rate their feelings of empathy towards the victim.

 "We were surprised by the interaction of age and species," Levin said. "Age seems to trump species, when it comes to eliciting empathy. In addition, it appears that adult humans are viewed as capable of protecting themselves while full grown dogs are just seen as larger puppies."

 Interestingly, the researchers found that the difference in empathy for children versus puppies was statistically non-significant.

 As for considering the opinions of 240 college students, Levin said it is common practice to use homogenous samples for studies such as his that center around an experiment. "Unlike survey research, experiments usually employ a homogenous sample in order to establish a cause and effect relationship rather than to generalize a large population," Levin said. "However, there is really no reason to believe that our results would differ very much nationally, particularly among college students."

 While the study focused on dogs and humans, Levin thinks the findings would be similar for cats and people as well. "Dogs and cats are family pets," he said. "These are animals to which many individuals attribute human characteristics." ||||| Puppies may be better at garnering empathy than people are, in some cases, a new study finds.

 People have more empathy for abused puppies and dogs than they do for adult humans who have been abused, a new study suggests.

 However, empathy for abused children was about the same as that for puppies and dogs, the study found.

 Researchers surveyed 240 college students and asked them to read one of four versions of a fictional news article about a brutal beating. The wording in articles was the same, except for the identity of the victim, which was either: an infant, an adult in his 30s, a puppy or a 6-year old dog. Participants then rated their level of empathy for the victim.

 Participants had higher levels of empathy for the abused child, puppy and dog than they did for the abused adult, the study found. [See 7 Surprising Health Benefits of Dog Ownership]

 The researchers had hypothesized that younger victims would receive more empathy, regardless of species. Instead, they found "Age makes a difference for empathy toward human victims, but not for dog victims," the researchers wrote in their study abstract, which will be presented this week at the American Sociological Association meeting in New York.

 "The fact that adult human crime victims receive less empathy than do child, puppy, and full-grown dog victims suggests that adult dogs are regarded as dependent and vulnerable, not unlike their younger canine counterparts and kids," study researcher Jack Levin, a sociology and criminology professor at Northeastern University in Boston, said in a statement.

 "It appears that adult humans are viewed as capable of protecting themselves, while full-grown dogs are just seen as larger puppies," Levin said.

 The researchers said they suspect they would find similar results if they looked at empathy levels for other abused pets, such as cats. "These are animals to which many individuals attribute human characteristics," Levin said.

 Women in the study were more empathetic than men towards human and animal victims. Studies show that women are generally more empathetic than men, Levin said. "The reason may be partially biological, given the role of females in childbirth and childrearing activities," he said.

 Because the new study involved only college-age students, it's not clear if the results apply to people who are significantly older or younger.

 Follow Rachael Rettner @RachaelRettner. FollowLiveScience @livescience, Facebook & Google+. Original article on LiveScience.com . |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– What's harder to watch: An adult human kicking a puppy or an adult human kicking another adult human? Science says: the puppy. A new study has found abused dogs—both puppies and grown-ups—elicit more sympathy than abused adult humans. Abused human kids, however, are equally sympathetic as abused dogs, LiveScience reports. "The fact that adult human crime victims receive less empathy than do child, puppy, and full grown dog victims suggests that adult dogs are regarded as dependent and vulnerable not unlike their younger canine counterparts and kids," says one of the study's researchers. The researchers at Northeastern University in Boston showed 240 students one of four news articles about a beating—each article was the same except for the victim, which was variously an infant, a puppy, a man in his 30s, or a 6-year-old dog. "We were surprised by the interaction of age and species," says a co-author of the study, per Science Daily. "Age seems to trump species, when it comes to eliciting empathy. In addition, it appears that adult humans are viewed as capable of protecting themselves while full grown dogs are just seen as larger puppies."


Here is a news article: The U.K. has become the first place in the world to allow Viagra, U.S. drug giant Pfizer’s mega-selling erectile dysfunction treatment, to be sold over the counter and without a prescription. Men seeking out the little blue pill will be able to buy Viagra Connect—which has the same central ingredient as regular Viagra—for about £19.99 for a pack of four pills and £34.99 for an eight-pack at the pharmacy.

 Pfizer (pfe) has been fighting to get Viagra an over-the-counter designation in the U.K. for a while now. In fact, it made its first request for direct pharmacy sales of Viagra in the U.K. nearly a decade ago and has also tried to get the European Union to approve a change from prescription to over-the-counter status. Beginning in spring 2018, Pfizer says, the OTC version of Viagra will be available to consumers (as long as the pharmacist thinks it’s okay for the individual). That could help reduce some of the embarrassment factor that erectile dysfunction patients sometimes face.

 Viagra has already faced competition from generic drug competitors in Europe after losing patent protection. In April 2020, it will also lose patent protection in the U.S., and generic Viagra versions will then be able to hit the American market.

 Globally, Pfizer raked in about $1.6 billion in Viagra sales in 2016. ||||| FILE PHOTO: The Pfizer logo is seen at their world headquarters in New York April 28, 2014. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

 LONDON (Reuters) - Pfizer’s big-selling erectile dysfunction drug Viagra has been given a green light for sale without a prescription in Britain, the first country to grant it over-the-counter status.

 The U.S. drugmaker said on Tuesday it was working on plans to launch the non-prescription version of the medicine, known as Viagra Connect, in the United Kingdom in the spring of 2018.

 The drug will only be available in pharmacies and its supply will depend on pharmacists’ assessment of its suitability for each individual.

 Viagra has been one of the pharmaceutical industry’s most successful prescription products since its launch in 1998, following a serendipitous discovery of its effects by researchers who had been studying it as a heart medicine.

 It achieved peak worldwide sales of more than $2 billion in 2012 but sales have since declined as patents have expired, prompting Pfizer to explore extending its brand value as a non-prescription drug.

 Viagra is so far the only erectile dysfunction medicine to be reclassified from “prescription only medicine” to “pharmacy” status in Britain. The change follows a lengthy review by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

 Pfizer will continue to make Viagra available as a prescription drug but the option of also buying it over-the-counter is likely to reduce demand for potentially ineffective and dangerous fakes.

 “It’s important men feel they have fast access to quality and legitimate care, and do not feel they need to turn to counterfeit online supplies which could have potentially serious side effects,” said Mick Foy, the MHRA’s group manager in vigilance and risk management of medicines. ||||| TIME Health For more, visit TIME Health

 The U.K. is set to be the first country to allow over-the-counter sales of the erectile dysfunction drug Viagra, after the medication was reclassified.

 Instead of going to see a doctor, men over the age of 18 will be able to obtain the drug after a conversation with a pharmacist. “Erectile dysfunction can be a debilitating condition, so it’s important men feel they have fast access to quality and legitimate care,” said Mick Foy of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body that made the decision. A four-pack of the drug, the formal name for which is Sildenafil, will cost around £20 ($27).

 Pfizer, the U.S. pharmaceutical company that manufactures the drug, said it had plans to launch a non-prescription version of Viagra in spring 2018, according to Reuters.

 The MRHA made the decision to deregulate the drug after a public consultation, and said it hoped the rule change would reduce the number of people buying counterfeit versions of the drug, which can be dangerous. The agency said that it had seized over £50m ($67m) of unlicensed and counterfeit erectile dysfunction medications in the past five years. |||||
A summary of this is?

– For the first time ever, Viagra will be available over the counter and without a prescription. Reuters reports Pfizer plans to start selling an over-the-counter version of the erectile dysfunction medication this spring in the UK. The new Viagra Connect will have the same major ingredient as regular Viagra, according to Fortune. Sales of Viagra have been declining since 2012, and Pfizer hopes an over-the-counter version will open a new revenue channel. The drug maker has been pushing for the UK to reclassify Viagra as a non-prescription drug for nearly a decade. That finally happened courtesy of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, Time reports. “Erectile dysfunction can be a debilitating condition, so it’s important men feel they have fast access to quality and legitimate care,” says Mick Foy of the MHRA. The agency hopes allowing anyone over the age of 18 to purchase Viagra at the pharmacy will reduce the number of people who buy dangerous counterfeit erectile dysfunction medication. Viagra Connect is the first non-prescription erectile dysfunction medication in the UK. It will cost approximately $27 for a four-pack.


Article:
poster="http://v.politico.com/images/1155968404/201709/1562/1155968404_5582404989001_5582297447001-vs.jpg?pubId=1155968404" true Kimmel, not Cassidy, is right on health care, analysts say

 In the war of words between Jimmy Kimmel and Sen. Bill Cassidy, the late-night host has the better grasp of health policy, health care analysts say.

 Kimmel — who had allied himself with Cassidy after the senator famously proposed a “Jimmy Kimmel test” for health reform — blasted the Louisiana Republican’s last-ditch Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill in a seven-minute monologue on Tuesday night. While Cassidy had pledged to protect people with pre-existing conditions like Kimmel’s infant son, who was born with a serious heart condition, the proposal Cassidy co-authored with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wouldn’t live up to those promises, Kimmel said.

 Story Continued Below

 “This guy, Bill Cassidy, he just lied right to my face,” Kimmel said.

 He then listed four pledges that Cassidy made when he appeared on Kimmel’s show in May, including a promise to lower health costs for Americans and to oppose insurance companies’ lifetime caps on coverage that Kimmel said would no longer be guaranteed under the new legislation.

 “Health care’s complicated [and] it’s boring; I don’t want to talk about it [and] the details are confusing,” Kimmel said in his monologue. “And that’s what these guys are relying on. … They’re taking care of the people who give them money, like insurance companies.”

 Cassidy countered Wednesday that the talk-show host didn’t grasp the nuances of his legislation. “I am sorry he does not understand,” the senator told CNN on Wednesday morning. “More people will have coverage, and we protect those with pre-existing conditions,” citing a provision in the bill that states would have to ensure certain protections for individuals.

 POLITICO Pulse newsletter Get the latest on the health care fight, every weekday morning — in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

 Graham on Wednesday defended his colleague, telling NBC News that Kimmel's monologue was "absolute garbage" and parroted "liberal talking points."

 Kimmel "went on national TV and called this man, who has worked for the underprivileged and health care all of his life, a liar and I think that's inappropriate," Graham said.

 President Donald Trump weighed in on Twitter on Wednesday night, saying that he wouldn't back Graham-Cassidy if it didn't have sufficient protections for patients with pre-existing conditions: "It does! A great Bill. Repeal & Replace," Trump tweeted. Later, Trump offered more personal support for Cassidy: "Senator (Doctor) Bill Cassidy is a class act who really cares about people and their Health(care), he doesn't lie-just wants to help people!"

 But experts say that Cassidy and Graham’s bill can't guarantee those protections and that Kimmel’s assessment was basically accurate because of the flexibility the bill gives states to set up their own health care systems. For example, health insurers could hike premiums for patients with pre-existing conditions if their states obtain waivers from Obamacare regulations — as Kimmel said.

 Cassidy’s plan “would pave the way for insurers to deny coverage to people with a history of medical conditions,” five HIV/AIDS groups warned in a joint statement on Tuesday.

 The bill would also roll back the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion and make other funding changes, like converting Obamacare funds into block grants and ending traditional Medicaid as an open-ended entitlement that would force states to choose whether to cut Medicaid enrollment, benefits or payments to providers — or else raise taxes.

 “Graham-Cassidy, like the previous Senate ‘repeal and replace’ proposals, takes a fiscal crowbar to Medicaid’s knees,” warned Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families. Those cuts could disproportionately affect children, program director Joan Alker added.

 "Kimmel did not overstate the impact," Alker said. "If Graham-Cassidy becomes law, there is no guarantee a child born with a congenital heart defect will get the coverage they need. It would depend on where they live, but even states with good intentions would struggle to protect children with the massive cuts to Medicaid included in this bill."

 The proposal’s significant cuts to Medicaid and other changes to the ACA’s regulations would lead to dramatic reductions in coverage for adults too, analysts say.

 “It is likely that the bill, if enacted, would lead to a loss of health insurance for at least 32 million people after 2026,” the left-leaning Commonwealth Fund’s Sara Collins wrote in a post on Wednesday, citing Congressional Budget Office analysis of similar legislation.

 Some conservatives disputed that the proposal would lead to coverage cuts. “I tend to think that the Graham-Cassidy proposal holds a lot of promise to expand coverage down the road,” said Lanhee Chen, a professor at Stanford’s conservative Hoover Institution.

 Chen cited the possibility of state flexibility and lower premiums bringing more uninsured Americans into the market, although he acknowledged that the bill's Medicaid cuts would force “tough trade-offs” in the future.

 The CBO, usually the authoritative source on such questions, said Monday that it would not be able to answer them on this bill "for at least several weeks" — long after the Sept. 30 expiration of the reconciliation bill that allows Republicans to pass the measure with a simple majority.

 One conservative policy analyst argued that neither Kimmel, nor Cassidy should be taking their case to TV.

 "In my view, neither are correct — or at the very least, neither should be certain in their assertions,” said Chris Jacobs of Juniper Research Group. "I’m agreeing with Jimmy Kimmel that health care is complicated, so reducing it to simple talking points — that means you too, Jimmy Kimmel — often belies the reality of the situation." ||||| Focused crawls are collections of frequently-updated webcrawl data from narrow (as opposed to broad or wide) web crawls, often focused on a single domain or subdomain. ||||| Jimmy Kimmel tripled down on his condemnation of the latest GOP-led effort to repeal and replace Obamacare during his monologue Thursday night, unloading scathing criticisms of President Trump and Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy, a co-author of the Graham-Cassidy bill.

 “For Donald Trump, this isn’t about the Graham-Cassidy bill,” Kimmel said. “It’s about Obamacare, which he hates, because Obama’s name is on it. He likes to have his name on things: buildings, vodka, you name it. At this point he would sign anything if it meant getting rid of Obamacare. He’d sign copies of the Quran at the Barnes and Noble in Fallujah if it meant he could get rid of Obamacare.”

 Kimmel added, “I guarantee [Trump] doesn’t know anything about this Graham-Cassidy bill. He doesn’t know the difference between Medicare and Medicaid; he barely knows the difference between Melania and Ivanka.”

 Kimmel has been hammering the Graham-Cassidy bill — which would enact deep cuts to Medicaid and likely cause millions of Americans to lose health coverage — this week, and Cassidy responded by saying the late-night host “does not understand” the proposed legislation.

 On Thursday, Kimmel said of Cassidy, “Some people tell me I should give him the benefit of the doubt, and you know what, I do give him the benefit of the doubt: I doubt all the benefits he claims are part of the new health care bill.”

 Kimmel went on to say that Cassidy, who is a doctor and helped found a community clinic in Baton Rouge, has done admirable work in the past.

 “He’s done good things, I just want him to keep doing good things,” Kimmel said. “This plan is not a good thing. His supporters say, ‘Well he’s a doctor and you’re not, what do you know?’ To them I say, all of these very reputable associations — American Diabetes Association, American Medical Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, the list goes on and on — all of these groups populated by doctors say this health care bill is bad, they’re against it. We haven’t seen this many people come forward to speak out against a bill since Cosby.”

 Watch the clip above for more. Jimmy Kimmel Live airs weeknights at 11:35 p.m. ET on ABC. ||||| Published on Sep 21, 2017

 Jimmy has found himself in the middle of a battle over American health care, so tonight he responds to more criticism from Senator Bill Cassidy and those other jerks who want to take our health care away.

 Jimmy Kimmel Fights Back Against Bill Cassidy, Lindsey Graham & Chris Christie https://youtu.be/wB5Hek7Z2b8

 SUBSCRIBE to get the latest #KIMMEL: http://bit.ly/JKLSubscribe

 Watch Mean Tweets: http://bit.ly/KimmelMT10

 Connect with Jimmy Kimmel Live Online:

 Visit the Jimmy Kimmel Live WEBSITE: http://bit.ly/JKLWebsite

 Like Jimmy Kimmel on FACEBOOK: http://bit.ly/KimmelFB

 Like Jimmy Kimmel Live on FACEBOOK: http://bit.ly/JKLFacebook

 Follow @JimmyKimmel on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/KimmelTW

 Follow Jimmy Kimmel Live on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/JKLTwitter

 Follow Jimmy Kimmel Live on INSTAGRAM: http://bit.ly/JKLInstagram

 About Jimmy Kimmel Live:

 Jimmy Kimmel serves as host and executive producer of Emmy-winning "Jimmy Kimmel Live," ABC's late-night talk show.

 "Jimmy Kimmel Live" is well known for its huge viral video successes with 5.6 billion views on YouTube alone.

 Some of Kimmel's most popular comedy bits include - Mean Tweets, Lie Witness News, Jimmy's Twerk Fail Prank, Unnecessary Censorship, YouTube Challenge, The Baby Bachelor, Movie: The Movie, Handsome Men's Club, Jimmy Kimmel Lie Detective and music videos like "I (Wanna) Channing All Over Your Tatum" and a Blurred Lines parody with Robin Thicke, Pharrell, Jimmy and his security guard Guillermo.

 Now in its fifteenth season, Kimmel's guests have included: Johnny Depp, Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise, Halle Berry, Harrison Ford, Jennifer Aniston, Will Ferrell, Katy Perry, Tom Hanks, Scarlett Johansson, Channing Tatum, George Clooney, Larry David, Charlize Theron, Mark Wahlberg, Kobe Bryant, Steve Carell, Hugh Jackman, Kristen Wiig, Jeff Bridges, Jennifer Garner, Ryan Gosling, Bryan Cranston, Jamie Foxx, Amy Poehler, Ben Affleck, Robert Downey Jr., Jake Gyllenhaal, Oprah, and unfortunately Matt Damon.

 Round 3 of Jimmy Kimmel’s Health Care Battle

 https://youtu.be/KUH0KQ1qMiw ||||| Is Jimmy Kimmel worth listening to beyond monologues or celebrity chats? He can make people laugh, sure, and coax conversation out of the most vapid stars. But on health care? “Health care is complicated, it’s boring. I don’t want to talk about it. The details are confusing,” the comedian allowed last night on Jimmy Kimmel Live! But not, apparently, confusing enough to lower Kimmel’s self-confidence. Graham-Cassidy would “kick about 30 million Americans off insurance” and is “actually worse than” the skinny repeal the Senate rejected in July, Kimmel said. He even added the humble parenthetical, “This is not my area of expertise.” That, at least, is truth on display: Anyone who figured being a comedian and talk-show host was a natural fit with policy expertise has been duly warned.

 Comedians have become public intellectuals in the popular imagination, so maybe some charity is in order. We should be open to the possibility that Kimmel has deep and hidden reservoirs of knowledge on risk-adjustment programs, the Medicaid expansion, or per capita caps. After all, Kimmel has, in the words of CNN, become the “conscience of the health care fight.” It’s not hard to see why: Kimmel has a moving family story to tell, a huge audience, and an unmistakable gift for the big screen. His infant son Billy has a heart condition that required surgery soon after birth and, like any father, Kimmel takes his son’s well-being seriously.

 But his genuinely scary experience represents the sum total of his health-care education, as far as one can tell. Months ago, Kimmel told Billy’s story before pivoting swiftly to Republicans’ attempts to reform the Affordable Care Act. The point was obvious: Republicans would not mind seeing Billy, or at least children like him with poorer parents, die. Kimmel deemed inhumane any provision that would weaken the Affordable Care Act’s regulations prohibiting insurers from charging higher premiums for those with pre-existing conditions, and Kimmel said that while he can obviously afford to pay his son’s bills, other parents might not be able to. Thus a comedian became the public face of perhaps the toughest issue facing legislators today.

 Senator Bill Cassidy (R., La.), now the co-sponsor of the latest Republican pass at health-care reform, proceeded to coin the “Jimmy Kimmel test” for health policy: Does the bill allow children with congenital heart defects to receive the necessary care without bankrupting their parents? The question is situated in a much larger problem plaguing policymakers, which is how to preserve elements of a free health-insurance market while also ensuring that people with more unfortunate health problems — who don’t have the luxury of choosing what health benefits to buy — can receive the appropriate assistance from the government.

 Won’t wash, Kimmel says. Cassidy and Graham’s bill fails the Jimmy Kimmel test, at least according to its namesake. Kimmel labeled Cassidy, who appeared on Kimmel’s show months ago to applause, a liar. Perhaps it was a mistake for a senator to arrogate rhetorical supremacy to a comedian, but Cassidy, for his part, has since pushed back. “I am sorry he does not understand,” Cassidy said today on CNN. “There will be more people covered under the Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson amendment than under the status quo,” he said later on MSNBC, explaining that his bill requires “coverage” of pre-existing conditions “to be ‘adequate and affordable.’”

 What to do about the health-care system is a complicated question. Kimmel has elected to probe the empirical matter of whether this bill does quite enough to erect a safety net for people with pre-existing conditions. There are legitimate critiques of Graham-Cassidy on those grounds, but at the same time, rhetoric about those with pre-existing conditions, or about the costs of reforming our current health-care system, tends toward exaggeration. And with the leeway Graham-Cassidy’s New Federalist framework would afford them, states might be able to find more efficacious ways to protect those people. The collective decision to elevate Kimmel to status as a leading bioethicist and policy wonk reduces a tricky debate to a single talking point. It forecloses the path this bill could open up for states to implement a more competitive insurance marketplace that could make things better for all Americans. And it’s worth pointing out, as Cassidy did, that the requirement Graham-Cassidy imposes on states to waive the relevant Obamacare regulation is not a mere formality.

 Of course, you won’t hear this on Jimmy Kimmel Live! Otherwise fans might check their phones instead of clapping or booing on cue.

 Policy expertise is hard-won and not likely to dawn suddenly during crises. It’s also not something that resides in people who make jokes for a living.

 It’s not objectionable for comedians to joke about politics. The political world is tense; comedy provides release. Politics is filled with figures who are eminently laughable, and joking about them is a tradition of the form. Late-night hosts’ lampooning of Clinton, Bush, or Trump follows Aristophanes’ lampooning of Athenian pols, and some of the best modern comedians have been the most unapologetic ones. So Kimmel should keep on making Americans laugh, and if he includes moving personal stories about his beloved son and advocates based upon what parenting a sick child has taught him, that’s no crime.

 But policy expertise is hard-won and not likely to dawn suddenly during crises. It’s also not something that resides in people who make jokes for a living. Just as Kimmel is entitled to share his opinion, his audience is entitled to seek more-informed ones.

 George Carlin was outraged, Dick Gregory was righteous, and Dave Chappelle is incisive. But even at their rawest, each was understood in the popular imagination to be a comedian. Does Kimmel want a career change? Or does Hollywood simply want to feel better about its propensity to wax earnest about complicated public-policy questions? Regarding anything in the era of Trump, it’s apparently time for comedians to get serious. They volunteer to do their part, not their bit — replacing good jokes with good points, laughs with nods.

 Such sanctimony degrades comedy. Who really laughs at The Daily Show, Full Frontal, or Last Week Tonight? But more importantly, swapping two unrelated discursive forms corrodes public discourse. Policy isn’t funny, and comedy isn’t policy. Kimmel’s love for his son is understandable. But his epistemic humility ended after the accurate admission that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about when it comes to health care. It’s irresponsible to pontificate on subjects one knows little about, but that didn’t stop him from calling Cassidy a liar.

 Once we substitute even sincere feelings for policy expertise, the results are unlikely to please anyone. Jimmy Kimmel can be funny, and he loves his son. Well and good. But Jimmy Kimmel knows policy? To paraphrase another comedian, comedians are not public intellectuals.

 READ MORE:

 A Thinking Mom’s Message for Jimmy Kimmel

 Jimmy Kimmel and the Dangers of Empathy

 David Letterman’s Crazy-Old-Coot Phase

 — Theodore Kupfer is a William F. Buckley Jr. Fellow in Political Journalism at National Review Institute. ||||| Tweet with a location

 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more |||||Summary:

– The Jimmy Kimmel-Bill Cassidy dust-up over health care circled back to Kimmel Thursday, the third night in a row that the late-night host has taken on the Louisiana senator over the latter's bill with Sen. Lindsey Graham to replace ObamaCare. Per EW, Kimmel addressed President Trump at the outset, noting that the commander in chief's aim is dumping ObamaCare, "which he hates, primarily because Obama's name is on it. … He'd sign copies of the Koran at the Barnes and Noble in Fallujah if it meant he could get rid of ObamaCare." Kimmel did have praise to offer for Cassidy, a doctor who started a community clinic in his home state. "He's done good things; I just want him to keep doing good things. This plan is not a good thing," said Kimmel, who then rattled off the doctor-tied organizations, including the AMA, that have come out against the bill. Although some media sources have given Kimmel a thumbs-up for his understanding of the legislation, the National Review has jumped into the fray, calling the host a "policy wonk wannabe" and asserting that "comedians are not public intellectuals." "Does Kimmel want a career change?" writes Theodore Kupfer. "Or does Hollywood simply want to feel better about its propensity to wax earnest about complicated public-policy questions?" Some are coming to Kimmel's defense with clips of the conservative-leaning Fox News interviewing other celebrities on various topics. Kimmel wrapped up his latest launch against Cassidy by addressing critics. "Some people tell me I should give him the benefit of the doubt," he said. "And you know what, I do give him the benefit of the doubt: I doubt all the benefits he claims are part of the new health care bill." The whole clip here.


Volume 21, Number 5—May 2015

 Research

 Novel Thogotovirus Associated with Febrile Illness and Death, United States, 2014

 Olga I. Kosoy, Amy J. Lambert, Dana J. Hawkinson, Daniel M. Pastula, Cynthia S. Goldsmith, D. Charles Hunt, and J. Erin Staples

 Author affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA (O.I. Kosoy, A.J. Lambert, D.M. Pastula, J.E. Staples) ; University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA (D.J. Hawkinson) ; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (C.S. Goldsmith) ; Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Topeka, Kansas, USA (D.C. Hunt)

 Cite This Article

 Abstract A previously healthy man from eastern Kansas, USA, sought medical care in late spring because of a history of tick bite, fever, and fatigue. The patient had thrombocytopenia and leukopenia and was given doxycycline for a presumed tickborne illness. His condition did not improve. Multiorgan failure developed, and he died 11 days after illness onset from cardiopulmonary arrest. Molecular and serologic testing results for known tickborne pathogens were negative. However, testing of a specimen for antibodies against Heartland virus by using plaque reduction neutralization indicated the presence of another virus. Next-generation sequencing and phylogenetic analysis identified the virus as a novel member of the genus Thogotovirus.

 The genus Thogotovirus (family Orthomyxoviridae) contains >6 distinct viruses, including Araguari, Aransas Bay, Dhori, Jos, Thogoto, and Upolu viruses (1–3). These viruses have been primarily associated with either hard or soft ticks and have a wide geographic distribution (1–8). The only virus in this genus known to occur in the United States is Aransas Bay virus, which was isolated from soft ticks (Ornithodoros spp.) collected from a seabird nest off the coast of Texas (3).

 Two viruses in the genus Thogotovirus (Thogoto and Dhori viruses) are currently known to cause human infection and disease. Antibodies against Thogoto virus have been identified in humans living in parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa (1,4,6,8). Two persons from Nigeria infected with this virus were identified in 1966. The first patient was a man with a febrile illness in whom neuromyelitis optica later developed. The second patient was a 14-year-old boy in whom meningitis developed and who died 6 days later because of complications of sickle cell disease (9).

 Antibodies against Dhori virus in humans have been reported in a similar distribution as those against Thogoto virus (1,6,8,10). Five patients with disease have been described after accidental laboratory exposure to Dhori virus; encephalitis developed in 2 of these patients (11). We report a novel Thogotovirus associated with a febrile illness and death that occurred in a man in the United States in 2014.

 The Case-Patient The patient was a previously healthy man >50 years of age from Bourbon County, Kansas, USA. While working outdoors on his property in late spring 2014, the patient had several tick bites and found an engorged tick on his shoulder several days before he became ill with nausea, weakness, and diarrhea. The following day, a fever, anorexia, chills, headache, myalgia, and arthralgia developed. On the third day of illness, the patient went to his primary care physician, who empirically prescribed doxycycline for a presumed tickborne illness because of his history of tick bites, symptoms, and no reported travel outside the immediate area. The following morning, the patient’s wife found him obtunded (experiencing reduced consciousness) but arousable. He was taken by ambulance to a local hospital. At the hospital, he had a temperature of 37.3°C, a pulse rate of 84 beats/min, and an increased blood pressure of 151/65 mm Hg. The patient had a papular rash on his trunk, but otherwise results of his physical examination were unremarkable. Initial laboratory findings showed leukopenia (2,200 cells/μL), lymphopenia (absolute lymphocyte count 550 cells/μL), thrombocytopenia (72,000 cells/μL), mild hyponatremia (sodium 133 mmol/L), hypokalemia (potassium 3.0 mmol/L), a creatinine level (0.8 mg/dL) within the reference range (0.6 mg/dL–1.2 mg/dL), a slightly increased level of blood urea nitrogen (25 μg/dL), and increased levels of aspartate aminotransferase (138 U/L) and alanine aminotransferase (86 U/L). He was admitted because of the principal problems of dehydration, syncope, and possible tickborne illness. He was given an intravenous (IV) fluid bolus, then maintenance fluids, and doxycycline (200 mg IV every 12 h for the first 24 h, then 100 mg IV every 12 h). Despite doxycycline therapy, the patient continued to report malaise and anorexia, and periodic fevers (maximum temperature 38.8°C) developed. At day 8 postillness onset, the patient was transferred to a tertiary care center for further evaluation and management. Patient samples collected before transfer showed no serologic evidence of Rocky Mountain spotted fever, Lyme disease, or ehrlichiosis. At initial assessment at the tertiary care center, the patient was febrile (temperature 39.4°C) and had a nontender left axillary lymphadenopathy; a diffuse maculopapular rash on his chest, abdomen, and back; petechiae on his soft palate and lower extremities; and bibasilar crackles in the lung fields. Laboratory testing continued to show mild leukopenia (3,600 cells/μL) but also showed worsening thrombocytopenia (34,000 cells/μL). His renal function was normal, but his aspartate aminotransferase level had increased to 119 U/L. Doxycycline treatment (100 mg IV every 12 h) was continued, and the patient was evaluated further for a potential etiology of his illness. Hematologic results suggested that his persistent thrombocytopenia and leukopenia were secondary to acute bone marrow suppression. A chest, abdomen, and pelvis computed tomography scan with contrast showed trace pleural effusions, bibasilar atelectasis, and multiple prominent abdominal lymph nodes. At day 9 postillness onset, he remained lucid and interactive, but he continued to have episodic high fever (temperature >39°C) and progressive dyspnea developed, which resulted in a need for supplemental oxygen. A chest radiograph showed new findings of pulmonary venous congestion and interstitial edema, suggestive of progressive heart failure or fluid overload, and an echocardiogram showed global hypokinesis. Because of increasing supplemental oxygen needs and progressive lactic acidosis, he was transferred to the intensive care unit and given broad-spectrum antimicrobial drugs on day 10 of his illness. His renal function began to deteriorate and his aminotransferase levels continued to increase. The patient was intubated because of acute respiratory distress syndrome and was given 3 vasopressor medications because of shock. The patient subsequently had sustained ventricular tachycardia with persistent hypotension and eventual pulseless electrical activity with refractory shock. After multiple resuscitations, the decision was made to withdraw further care, and he died shortly after being extubated, 11 days after first becoming ill. An autopsy was not performed. Results of comprehensive evaluations for tickborne diseases, including serologic testing for Rocky Mountain spotted fever, tularemia, brucella, babesiosis, and Q fever; molecular testing for Ehrlichia spp. and Anaplasma phagocytophilum; and blood thin smears for Babesia spp. were negative. Results of evaluations for fungal pathogens (Aspergillus spp. galactomannan, antibodies against Histoplasma spp., and Histoplasma spp. antigen in serum and urine) were negative. Evaluations for cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, and parvovirus showed past infection. Test results for hepatitis B and C viruses, West Nile virus, and HIV were also negative. Blood, sputum, and urine bacterial cultures were negative. A whole blood specimen collected 9 days after illness onset was sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (Fort Collins, CO, USA) for Heartland virus testing as part of an active institutional review board-approved protocol.

 Materials and Methods Clinical Specimen Handling and Evaluation At CDC, EDTA-treated blood, along with serum separated from that blood, were tested for Heartland viral RNA and neutralizing antibodies by real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT) with 6-well plates with confluent Vero E6 monolayers, according to protocols described elsewhere (12,13). Standard virus isolation methods were also used. In brief, 200 μL of undiluted and 1:10 dilutions of blood or serum specimens were inoculated onto confluent Vero cells in T25 flasks. Inoculated flasks were then incubated at 37°C and reviewed for cytopathic effect daily. Viral Genome Sequencing, RT-PCR, and Phylogenetic Analyses Supernatants collected from standard virus isolation cell cultures were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods by using the Ion Torrent PGM sequencer (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY, USA) and methods as described (14). After novel viral sequences were identified by NGS, a real-time RT-PCR was designed to target the newly derived sequences and applied to blood and serum samples by using methods described (15). Phylogenetic analyses were conducted on deduced amino acid sequences from multiple genomic segments of selected viruses of the same viral family by using MEGA 5.05 software (http://www.megasoftware.net/) as described (16).

 Results Isolation and Identification of Virus in Blood and Serum Figure 1 Blood and serum showed negative results for Heartland viral RNA and antibodies against this virus. However, heterologous viral (non–Heartland viral) plaques were noted in PRNT cell culture wells, which indicated the presence of another virus (Figure 1). Standard virus isolation methods showed a substantial cytopathic effect at day 3 postinoculation in cells that were inoculated with blood or serum specimens. These findings were confirmed by repeated isolation attempts. Figure 2 Negative stain and thin-section electron microscopy showed pleomorphic viral particles consistent with viruses in the family Orthomyxoviridae (Figure 2). NGS methods applied to cell culture supernatants from multiple isolations showed the presence of novel orthomyxoviral RNA. We observed ≈70% overall average nucleotide sequence percentage identity with Dhori virus in multiple genomic segments. Blood and serum samples were verified as the source of the novel virus by real-time RT-PCR–based detection of viral RNA in these samples. Phylogenetic Analyses Figure 3 Three phylogenies, each generated by a neighbor-joining method applied with 2,000 bootstrap replicates for grouping analysis, were chosen as representative of overall genetic relationships of selected viruses (Figure 3). The novel virus was found to group with strong support along with Dhori virus, and the closely related Batken virus, in all trees.

 Discussion Using traditional techniques (i.e., PRNT and culturing on animal cells) in combination with NGS, we isolated a novel virus from a blood sample collected 9 days after illness onset from a previously healthy man. It is likely that this novel Thogotovirus, which we are proposing to call Bourbon virus after the county of residence of the patient, was the cause of his illness. Although it is unclear what role the virus played in the death of the patient, the high level of viremia, as shown by multiple isolations from the blood of the patient 2 days before his death, suggests that this might have contributed to the death of the patient. The patient had a history of tick exposure, as well as symptoms and laboratory findings (i.e., leukopenia and thrombocytopenia) consistent with a tickborne illness. Several tickborne pathogens, such as Ehrlichia chaffensis, Rickettsia, and Heartland virus, are present in eastern Kansas and adjacent areas (17–19). However, the patient did not respond to doxycycline therapy initiated 3 days after illness onset and had negative results for these and other tickborne pathogens. Of the 7 symptomatic human infections that have been associated with viruses in the genus Thogotovirus, most case-patients have had neurologic findings (e.g., meningitis, encephalitis) without any described abnormalities in blood counts (9,11). Although cerebrospinal fluid was not tested for the patient reported, his clinical signs and symptoms were not suggestive of neurologic infection. Furthermore, the patient did not have any respiratory symptoms that would be expected with other viruses that are known human pathogens in the large family of Orthomyxoviridae, such as influenza virus (1). Phylogenetic analyses indicated that Bourbon virus is most closely related to Dhori and Batken viruses. However, the branch lengths suggest a relatively distant evolutionary distinction of Bourbon virus from Dhori and Batken viruses, which have only been described in the Eastern Hemisphere. Dhori, Batken, and Thogoto viruses have been identified in various hard tick species (1). However, Batken virus also has been identified in mosquitoes (1). It is currently unknown how Bourbon virus is transmitted to humans. However, illness onset of the patient in late spring and a history of finding an embedded tick before becoming ill support the notion that Bourbon virus might be transmitted by ticks. Therefore, to potentially prevent Bourbon virus disease, as well as other tickborne diseases, persons should be advised to avoid tick bites by using an insect repellent registered with the US Environmental Protection Agency to be effective against ticks, wearing long sleeves and pants, avoiding bushy and wooded areas, and performing tick checks after spending time outdoors. The discovery of Bourbon virus, in addition to recent discoveries of tick-associated Heartland and severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome viruses (19,20), suggests that the public health burden of these pathogens has been underestimated. As nonselective molecular methods of pathogen identification (i.e., NGS sequencing) become more widely used, ideally in combination with classical microbiologic techniques, it is anticipated that similar discoveries will be made in the future. It is currently not known how many human infections and disease cases might be attributable to this novel pathogen. On the basis of limited information for our case-patient, health care providers might consider Bourbon virus as a potential infectious etiology in patients in whom fever, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia develop without a more likely explanation and who have shown negative results for other tickborne diseases (e.g., ehrlichiosis, anaplasmosis, or Heartland virus disease) or have not responded to doxycycline therapy. Work is planned to identify additional human infections with this novel virus, as well as to explore its potential geographic distribution. Also, more comprehensive virologic characterizations and field work are ongoing to better understand the biology of, and to identify potential vectors and reservoirs for, Bourbon virus. These data will be critical to further characterize the epidemiology and illness caused by Bourbon virus and to implement potential prevention and control measures.

 Ms. Kosoy is a microbiologist at the Arboviral Diseases Branch, Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado. Her research interests are diagnosis of arboviral diseases and biology of arboviruses.

 Acknowledgment

 We thank Jason Velez for preparing cells; Kristen Burkhalter, Jan Pohl, Roger Nasci, Nicky Sulaiman, and Emily Pau for facilitation of development of the rapid Bourbon real-time RT-PCR; Amanda Panella for assistance with handling the samples; and Robert S. Lanciotti, Ingrid Rabe, and Marc Fischer for their input on diagnostic evaluation, and review of the manuscript.

 References

 McCauley JW , Hongo S , Kaverin NV , Kochs G , Lamb RA , Matrosovich MN , Family Orthomyxoviridae. In: King AM, Adams MJ, Carstens EB, Lefkowitz EJ, editors. Virus taxonomy: classification and nomenclature of viruses. Ninth report of the International Committee of Taxonomy of Viruses. New York: Elsevier Inc.; 2012 . p. 749–61. Briese T , Chowdhary R , Travassos da Rosa A , Hutchison SK , Popov V , Street C , Upolu virus and Aransas Bay virus, two presumptive bunyaviruses, are novel members of the family Orthomyxoviridae. J Virol . 2014 ; 88 : 5298 – 309 . DOI PubMed Bussetti AV , Palacios G , Travassos da Rosa A , Savji N , Jain K , Guzman H , Genomic and antigenic characterization of Jos virus. J Gen Virol . 2012 ; 93 : 293 – 8 . DOI PubMed Kuno G , Chang GJ , Tsuchiya KR , Miller BR . Phylogeny of Thogoto virus. Virus Genes . 2001 ; 23 : 211 – 4 . DOI PubMed Da Silva EV , Da Rosa AP , Nunes MR , Diniz JA , Tesh RB , Cruz AC , Araguari virus, a new member of the family Orthomyxoviridae: serologic, ultrastructural, and molecular characterization. Am J Trop Med Hyg . 2005 ; 73 : 1050 – 8 . PubMed Filipe AR , Calisher CH , Lazuick J . Antibodies to Congo-Crimean haemorrhagic fever, Dhori, Thogoto and Bhanja viruses in southern Portugal. Acta Virol . 1985 ; 29 : 324 – 8 . PubMed Sang R , Onyango C , Gachoya J , Mabinda E , Konongoi S , Ofula V , Tickborne arbovirus surveillance in market livestock, Nairobi, Kenya. Emerg Infect Dis . 2006 ; 12 : 1074 – 80 . DOI PubMed Hubálek Z , Rudolf I . Tick-borne viruses in Europe. Parasitol Res . 2012 ; 111 : 9 – 36 . DOI PubMed Moore DL , Causey OR , Carey DE , Reddy S , Cooke AR , Akinkugbe FM , Arthropod-borne viral infections of man in Nigeria, 1964–1970. Ann Trop Med Parasitol . 1975 ; 69 : 49 – 64 . PubMed Sokhey J , Dandawate CN , Gogate SS , Ghosh SN , Gupta NP . Serological studies on Dhori virus. Indian J Med Res . 1977 ; 66 : 726 – 31 . PubMed Butenko AM , Leshchinskaia EV , Semashko IV , Donets MA , Mart’ianova LI . Dhori virus—a causative agent of human disease. 5 cases of laboratory infection . Vopr Virusol . 1987 ; 32 : 724 – 9 . PubMed Muehlenbachs A , Fata C , Lambert AJ , Paddock CD , Velez JO , Blau DM , Heartland virus–associated death in Tennessee. Clin Infect Dis . 2014 ; 59 : 845 – 50 . DOI PubMed Beaty BJ , Calisher CH , Shope RE . Arboviruses. In: Lennette EH, Lennette DA, Lennette ET, editors. Diagnostic procedures for viral, rickettsial and chlamydial Infections. 7th ed. Washington (DC): American Public Health Association; 1995 . p. 189–212. Huhtamo E , Lambert AJ , Costantino S , Servino L , Krizmancic L , Boldorini R , Isolation and full genomic characterization of Batai virus from mosquitoes, Italy 2009. J Gen Virol . 2013 ; 94 : 1242 – 8 . DOI PubMed Lambert AJ , Martin DA , Lanciotti RS . Detection of North American eastern and western equine encephalitis viruses by nucleic acid amplification assays. J Clin Microbiol . 2003 ; 41 : 379 – 85 . DOI PubMed Lambert AJ , Lanciotti RS . Molecular characterization of medically important viruses of the genus Orthobunyavirus. J Gen Virol . 2008 ; 89 : 2580 – 5 . DOI PubMed Chapman AS , Murphy SM , Demma LJ , Holman RC , Curns AT , McQuiston JH , Rocky Mountain spotted fever in the United States, 1997–2002. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis . 2006 ; 6 : 170 – 8 . DOI PubMed Pastula DM , Turabelidze G , Yates KF , Jones TF , Lambert AJ , Panella AJ , Notes from the field: Heartland virus disease—United States, 2012–2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep . 2014 ; 63 : 270 – 1 . PubMed McMullan LK , Folk SM , Kelly AJ , MacNeil A , Goldsmith CS , Metcalfe MG , A new phlebovirus associated with severe febrile illness in Missouri. N Engl J Med . 2012 ; 367 : 834 – 41 . DOI PubMed Yu XJ , Liang MF , Zhang SY , Liu Y , Li JD , Sun YL , Fever with thrombocytopenia associated with a novel bunyavirus in China. N Engl J Med . 2011 ; 364 : 1523 – 32 . DOI PubMed

 Figures

 Table of Contents – Volume 21, Number 5—May 2015 ||||| Breaking News Emails Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.

 Scientists are reporting on a new virus, never seen before anywhere, that apparently killed a Kansas man last year.

 They’re calling it Bourbon virus, after the county in Kansas where the previously healthy man lived. He’d been bitten by ticks before he got sick so doctors believe the virus is carried by ticks.

 “We were not looking for a new virus,” said Charles Hunt, Kansas state epidemiologist, who helped report on the new virus.

 “We are surprised. We really don’t know much about this virus. It’s important to find out more from a public health perspective. It is possible that other persons have been infected with this and not known it?”

 “It took months to find out this a novel virus that belonged to a genus of viruses called Thogotovirus."

 The research team is not giving details on the man other than that he was healthy, under the age of 50 and working outdoors on his property in eastern Kansas last spring when he came inside with tick bites and one fat tick still on his shoulder.

 A few days later, he developed nausea, diarrhea and felt weak. By the third day, he had fever, muscle aches and chills and went to the doctor, who prescribed an antibiotic called doxycycline which can treat several tick-borne infections, including one that causes Lyme disease.

 But by the fourth day, the patient was drifting in and out of consciousness and was taken by ambulance to the hospital. He just got sicker, and blood tests cleared him of the usual tickborne illnesses such as Rocky Mountain spotted fever, Lyme disease, or ehrlichiosis.

 His heart started to fail and then his kidneys, and he died 11 days after first becoming ill, the researchers report in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases.

 Doctors tested his blood for all sorts of infections, from tularemia and Q fever to fungal infections such as aspergillosis. The medical team finally decided to check for another new mystery virus called Heartland virus, another tickborne virus that had only turned up in 2011.

 Hunt passed the samples along to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s lab in Fort Collins, Colorado, which is looking for cases of Heartland virus.

 Technicians there ran all sorts of tests that came back negative, says the CDC’s Dr. Erin Staples. CDC microbiologist Olga Kosoy noticed a virus growing on the patient’s blood sample. Her colleague Amy Lambert sequenced the virus’s genome using advanced molecular detection. It wasn't anything that had been seen before.

 “It took months to find out this a novel virus that belonged to a genus of viruses called Thogotovirus,” Staples told NBC news.

 “Thogotoviruses have been described throughout the world.” But they rarely cause human disease, and the closest relative to the virus ever seen in the U.S. was a sample found in a bird’s nest in Aransas Bay, off the coast of Texas.

 Staples thinks the new virus may have occasionally infected people, but they never knew what they had. Scientists only recently have possessed the tools and facilities needed to make this kind of identification.

 “I think it has probably been present for a while,” Staples said.

 When the weather warms up, scientists will visit the area looking for ticks, mosquitoes and perhaps animals that might be carrying the virus. They may also take a look at the blood of people with illnesses that were never definitively diagnosed to see if they have antibodies to Bourbon virus.

 “I think it has probably been present for a while."

 In the meantime, people should not worry, but it does give people yet another reason to avoid ticks by wearing long sleeves and using insect repellant outside, Staples and Hunt both said.

 The best-known is tickborne disease is Lyme disease, which infected about 30,000 people in the U.S. in 2010. Other infections include anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis, which affect about 1,000 people each a year, and babesiosis, which infects about 1,100 people a year. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever infects about 2,500 people a year.

 As of March 2014, eight cases of Heartland virus disease have been identified among residents of Missouri and Tennessee, CDC says.

 Heartland virus was first noticed in 2009 when two men in Missouri developed high fevers, diarrhea, fatigue and a severe drop in the number of their white blood cells, immune cells that fight infection. The symptoms are very similar to those caused by Bourbon virus in the Kansas man. |||||

Write a summary.

– The Bourbon virus—so named because it first emerged recently in Bourbon County, Kansas—has puzzled researchers. A man with the first known case of the disease died last year, and since then, experts have been working to learn more about it. A new study outlines findings, NBC News reports. "It took months to find out this a novel virus that belonged to a genus of viruses called Thogotovirus," which have been seen "throughout the world," CDC researcher Erin Staples tells NBC. Just one example of the Thogotovirus has appeared in the US, the researchers write in a CDC publication: Aransas Bay virus, found in ticks in a seabird nest off Texas. Though the Kansas death is the first scientists have linked to the illness, Staples believes it has probably affected others; they just didn't know it. That doesn't mean we should panic, she notes; we should just continue to protect ourselves against ticks, which may be carriers. Mosquitoes and other animals may also be involved, and researchers are preparing to investigate.


Summarize this article:

The spokesman for the Illinois lottery says three tickets have split the record $640 million Mega Millions jackpot.

 Mega Millions Lottery tickets that were given away to the first 540 people are displayed by the Hoosier Lottery's Mega Millions mascot at a store in Zionsville, Ind., Friday, March 30, 2012. The Mega... (Associated Press)

 A Mega Millions lottery contestant buys his ticket for Friday's $500-million game at a corner newsstand in New York, Thursday, March 29, 2012. Forget setting up a charity or establishing a trust, the... (Associated Press)

 Alfredo Mora, 91, shows off his lottery ticket for a chance at the historic Mega Millions jackpot, that reached more than $600 million on Friday, March 30, 2012, in New York. After nobody won the March... (Associated Press)

 Mike Lang says the winning tickets were in Illinois, Kansas and Maryland.

 He says the Illinois winning ticket was sold in the small town of Red Bud, near St. Louis. The Maryland lottery announced earlier its winner was from Baltimore County. No details have been released on the winning ticket in Kansas.

 Lang says each winning ticket was expected to be worth more than $213 million before taxes.

 THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

 Maryland lottery officials announced early Saturday that their state sold what could become the world's largest lottery payout of all-time, but it wasn't immediately clear if that ticket holder would get sole possession of the $640 million jackpot or have to split it with other winners.

 Carole Everett, director of communications for the Maryland Lottery, said the winning Mega Millions ticket was purchased at a retailer in Baltimore County. She said it's too early to know any other information about the lucky ticket holder or whether others were sold elsewhere in the nation.

 The winning numbers were 02-04-23-38-46, and the Mega Ball 23.

 National lottery officials were expecting to list early Saturday on their website how many winning tickets were sold and from what states, but Maryland sent out its news release and called media organizations hours before the scheduled announcement. The headline of its news release said the winning sale was "one of several nationwide," but Everett told The Associated Press she couldn't immediately confirm any others.

 Everett said the last time a ticket from the state won a major national jackpot was 2008 when a ticket sold for $24 million.

 "We're thrilled," she said. "We're due and excited."

 The estimated jackpot dwarfs the previous $390 million record, which was split in 2007 by two winners who bought tickets in Georgia and New Jersey.

 Americans spent nearly $1.5 billion for a chance to hit the jackpot, which amounts to a $462 million lump sum and around $347 million after federal tax withholding. With the jackpot odds at 1 in 176 million, it would cost $176 million to buy up every combination. Under that scenario, the strategy would win $171 million less if your state also withholds taxes.

 From coast to coast, people stood in line at retail stores Friday for one last chance at striking it rich.

 Maribeth Ptak, 31, of Milwaukee, only buys Mega Millions when the jackpot is really big and she bought one on Friday at a Milwaukee grocery store. She said she'd use the money to pay off bills, including school loans, and then she'd donate a good portion to charity.

 "I know the odds are really not in my favor, but why not," she said.

 Sawnya Castro, 31, of Dallas, bought $50 worth of tickets at a 7-Eleven. She figured she'd use the money to create a rescue society for Great Danes, fix up her grandmother's house, and perhaps even buy a bigger one for herself.

 "Not too big _ I don't want that. Too much house to keep with," she said.

 Willie Richards, who works for the U.S. Marshals Service at a federal courthouse in Atlanta, figured if there ever was a time to confront astronomical odds, it was when $640 million was at stake. He bought five tickets.

 "When it gets as big as it is now, you'd be nuts not to play," he said. "You have to take a chance on Lady Luck."

 ___

 Associated Press Writers Carrie Antlfinger in Milwaukee, Jamie Stengle in Dallas and Kate Brumback in Atlanta contributed to this report. ||||| Maryland sold one of the winning tickets for last night’s record-breaking $640 million Mega Millions jackpot, lottery officials said.

 The lucky ticket was purchased around 7:15 p.m. Friday at a 7-Eleven in Baltimore County in the 8000 block of Liberty Road in Milford Mill. The winner bought one ticket with randomly selected numbers just a few hours before sales ended.

 The jackpot is considered the single largest in world history, according to lottery officials. The Maryland winner will split the prize with winners in Kansas and Illinois, the Los Angeles Times reported.

 Officials are also waiting for information on jackpot winners from other Mega Millions states. Carole Everett, a Maryland Lottery spokeswoman, said there were additional jackpot winners from other states, but it was not yet clear how many and where. There were four, $250,000 winners in Maryland as well.

 "Unfortunately, they're going to have to deal with sharing a $640 million jackpot," she said. Everett said no winner has yet come forward for the Maryland ticket. The winning store will get $100,000.

 The multi-state Mega Millions game is played in 44 states and jurisdictions, including Maryland, Virginia, Delaware and the District of Columbia. Last night’s winning numbers were 2-4-23-38-46 and Mega Ball 23. The Illinois Lottery says a grand prize ticket was sold at a store in Red Bud, Ill., near St. Louis, according to the Chicago Tribune.

 The store that sold the ticket was a mob scene early Saturday, with national press and curious onlookers gathered in the parking lot. Several satellite trucks have set up with lights and cameras.

 Rodney Gould, who lives a five minute walk from the store, stopped by to buy some Hall's cough drops without realizing that the store had sold a historic ticket. He grabbed his chest and sighed when he heard.

 "I should have purchased that ticket," he said. Gould bought a ticket at the 7-11 on Thursday.

 “This is truly remarkable and historic,” said Maryland Lottery Director Stephen Martino said in a statement. “We can’t wait to greet the winner of this world-record setting jackpot.”

 Maryland has been the site of several major lottery wins in recent years.

 In December, the restaurant and liquor store Wesley's in Elkton sold a $125 million winning Powerball ticket. In 2007, Mace Liquors in Essex sold a $26 million Mega Millions winning ticket. That same year, Walther Liquors in Nottingham sold a $330 million Mega Millions winning ticket to Ellwood August "Bunky" Bartlett and his wife, Denise.

 luke.Broadwater@baltsun.com

 twitter.com/lukebroadwater ||||| Comments are filtered for language and registration is required. The Times makes no guarantee of comments' factual accuracy. Readers may report inappropriate comments by clicking the Report Abuse link next to a comment. Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form. |||||

– At least three lucky (and still anonymous) souls have winning tickets in the $640 million Mega Millions jackpot, reports AP. The winners were sold in Illinois (in Red Bud, near St. Louis); Maryland (in the Baltimore suburb of Milford Mill, reports the Baltimore Sun); and somewhere in Kansas. California struck out but had lots of close calls, notes the Los Angeles Times: Twenty-nine tickets there matched five of the six numbers, and each should be worth in the "high hundreds of thousands." For the record, the lucky numbers were 2-4-23-38-46, with the Mega Ball of 23.


RUSSELL, Kan. (AP) — A 59-year-old Kansas man was killed when the motorcycle he was driving Friday night collided with a black cow on a blacktopped road.

 Kansas Highway Patrol trooper Brant Birney said there were no witnesses when James Zordel hit the cow on a paved rural road about six miles south of Interstate 70 near Russell.

 Zordel was driving in the roadway when the accident happened and it is not clear if he was speeding or if the cow suddenly appeared from the side of the road.

 "It was dark. He was driving down a blacktop road and he hit a black cow," Birney said, adding that exactly what caused the accident may never be known.

 Zordel, who was not wearing a helmet, died at the scene. ||||| A man is dead after running his motorcycle into a black cow late Friday night in Russell County.

 Kansas Highway Patrol crash logs show James Zordel, 59, of Russell, was northbound in the 3500 block of 189th street about 6.5 miles south of I-70, when his 1992 Suzuki motorcycle collided with the animal.

 Zordel was pronounced dead at the scene. No one else was hurt. The KHP reports Zordel was not wearing a helmet at the time of the crash. |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– A 59-year-old Kansas man was killed when the motorcycle he was driving Friday night collided with a black cow on a blacktopped road, reports KAKE. Kansas Highway Patrol trooper Brant Birney said there were no witnesses when James Zordel hit the cow on a paved rural road about six miles south of Interstate 70 near Russell. It's not clear if Zordel was speeding or if the cow suddenly appeared from the side of the road, notes the AP. "It was dark. He was driving down a blacktop road and he hit a black cow," Birney said, adding that exactly what caused the accident may never be known. Zordel, who was not wearing a helmet, died at the scene.


Summarize this article:

So, here are some cheerful statistics for you: According to RAINN, about 60% of rapes aren’t reported. In those cases, there’s about a 51% chance that the 40% of reported rapes will have an arrest made. There’s an 80% chance of prosecution. And, given various factors including conviction and sentencing, there’s only about a 16.3% chance that someone who commits rape will serve time for that rape. Meaning: If we factor in the rapes that go unreported, only 6% of rapists ever serve time. EVER.

 Gee, it sounds like making sure that rape accusations are taken seriously, and pursued to the full extent of the law, in all cases, is a pretty important issue, for progressives!

 Meanwhile, here are some facts: A man has been accused of rape by two separate women. He fled the country in which he was accused. He is fighting extradition, so that he won’t have to go back to that country and face charges — even though there are spectacularly low rates of conviction for accused rapists, he just doesn’t think that he should have to go through the system, for whatever reason. And you know who’s posting bail for him?

 Fucking progressives. That’s who. Including one man who has, for some years now, served as one of the most prominent and recognizable faces of the American left, filmmaker/rabble-rouser/all-around champion of the Truth and the Little Guy, Michael Moore. He’s put $20,000 hard, cashy dollars on the line, so that Julian Assange, white male left-wing darling, will be able to get out on bail despite posing a substantial and acknowledged flight risk, and despite the fact that he evidently is working to avoid facing the charges of his accusers. And why is that? Well, as per Michael Moore’s lengthy diatribe on the subject, which contains exactly one paragraph about the rape charges, his reasoning is as follows:

 For those of you who think it’s wrong to support Julian Assange because of the sexual assault allegations he’s being held for, all I ask is that you not be naive about how the government works when it decides to go after its prey. Please — never, ever believe the “official story.” And regardless of Assange’s guilt or innocence (see the strange nature of the allegations here), this man has the right to have bail posted and to defend himself.

 In other words: Never, ever believe the women who are accusing Assange of rape. Never, ever believe the allegations that he forcibly held a woman down and raped her, never, ever believe that he raped a woman while she was unconscious. “Regardless of his guilt or innocence” — and it’s clear that Moore has chosen to believe in his “innocence,” despite the fact that Assange’s working to avoid being tried for the crime — help him. Don’t believe anything you hear about the charges, don’t believe the official story, despite the fact that Assange’s people have been caught lying — it turns out there is no such crime as “sex by surprise” in Sweden as Assange’s lawyer Mark Stephens alleged, it is not worth a fine of $715 because it doesn’t exist, and there is also no Swedish law against having sex with a broken condom; what is against the law in Sweden, it turns out, is rape, which is what Assange has been charged with — and a reasonable person might assume that they are the ones it’s unsafe to believe. Don’t believe them. The allegations are “strange.” (They sure did seem that way, when they were being inaccurately reported all over the place, thanks in part to misinformation spread by Assange’s defense.) Believe Michael Moore.

 Believe Michael Moore when he tells you that giving $20,000 in bail is fair, because WikiLeaks is important, because the government keeps secrets, and for a lot of people, “secrets killed them.”

 Sorry, but you brought this upon yourself. No one can hide from the truth now. No one can plot the next Big Lie if they know that they might be exposed.

 Says Michael Moore. But hey, Michael, you know what exposes a Big Lie, a lot of the time? Rape allegations. You know who knows all about big lies? Women who have been raped. Raped, sometimes, by powerful men within our communities; raped by men who were beloved and supported by those communities; raped by our fellow progressives. And we didn’t report, because we knew no-one would believe us; because we knew we’d be shamed and smeared and lied about and harassed until we agreed to go away and let the Big Lie continue to exist. You want to employ the phrase “secrets killed them?” Women who have been raped know all about how secrets can kill people. And how, often, it’s telling the secret that gets you killed. Ask the women who are pressing these charges — their names have been so widely leaked, in one case by your fellow “progressive” media dudebro, Keith Olbermann, that it is possible to find their home addresses, their personal blogs and social media accounts, and to track their activities and personal lives. I’d imagine that they are very much in fear for their lives, due in large part to people like you, Michael Moore, who are insisting that they should not be believed.

 And you’re the face of the Left. You have the platform, you have the power, you have the cash and the fame and the name and face recognition: You claim to speak for us. And when you speak, you don’t stand against rape.

 So, who remembers the climactic scene of Roger and Me? Everybody, right? Poor little guy Michael Moore, standing up against The Man, standing outside the office of The Man, in fact, just because Roger has done something that has immeasurably harmed his community, and he wants to talk to the guy. He wants to hold him accountable. He wants Roger to look him in the face and tell him why he’s hurt all of these people.

 You know what immeasurably harms the progressive community, though, is rape and rape apologism. Is victim-blaming; is accuser-smearing; is the unwillingness of men in positions of power to consider rape a crucial issue that must be taken seriously. And the person who’s hurting our community, and refusing to take responsibility for that, right now, is Michael Moore.

 So thank God he’s on Twitter. He is @MMFlint, in fact! And here’s what we’re going to do: We’re going to use the #Mooreandme hashtag to tell him why what he has done and said is wrong. We’re going to talk to the man. We’re going to stand outside his window with a megaphone until he comes down and talks to us. And what we’re going to say — what I hope you’re going to say — is this:

 We are the progressive community. We are the left wing. We are women and men, we are from every sector of this community, and we believe that every rape accusation must be taken seriously, regardless of the accused rapist’s connections, power, influence, status, fame, or politics. We believe that rape is a crucial and central issue which affects us all, women disproportionately, and we are sick of being told that you should “never, ever believe” us. We believe that accuser-shaming, accuser-harassment, victim-blaming, and the suppression of rape cases all serve one distinct purpose, which is: TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO RAPE US AND GET AWAY WITH IT. To make us scared to report our rapes, even to the people we know. And we will not stand for it any more. We require — not ask, not prefer, absolutely require — progressive media and public figures to stand against rape in every case. Again, this is not negotiable. This is mandatory. This is a requirement: If you don’t stand against rape, and make that stand a crucial and central part of your platform, we do not accept you either as a real “progressive” or as someone who is in any way qualified for authority or a leadership position. We will not buy your merchandise; we will not support you; we will speak out against you. Because a progressive movement that doesn’t stand against rape isn’t a progressive movement. It’s just The Man, it’s just the oppressor, it’s just oppression, in a baseball hat, holding a camcorder.

 Please tweet @MMFlint, using the hashtag #Mooreandme, until we have an explanation from Michael Moore, and preferably an apology, and preferably $20,000, donated to an anti-sexual-assault organization of his choice.

 You told us the little guy had to stand up, Mr. Moore. You told us the authority had to be held accountable for harming communities. You told us that the Big Lies were worth exposing. But you’re promoting the Big Lie, you’re harming our community, and this time around, the little guy is us.

 We can be loud. We can be persistent. I hope you’re prepared. ||||| iStockphoto/jaroon/Salon

 Oh no, Keith Olbermann has quit Twitter. Or "suspended his account," or something. He quit the Internet in a huff, which is never a good idea, especially when you're a prominent public figure, like Mr. Olbermann, who has a TV show. It's just not a good look! You come off as, you know, thin-skinned. Incapable of taking criticism. What was the "frenzy" about, exactly? Well, the term "rape apologist" was thrown about.

 First, there was this segment, from "Countdown," in which Michael Moore explained why he posted bail for WikiLeaks founder and accused rapist Julian Assange:

 Moore called Assange's arrest "hooey" and claimed that Assange was arrested solely because a condom broke during sex. Sigh.

 That led to this post by the formidable blogger Sady Doyle, in which she urged people to tweet their displeasure directly to Moore and Olbermann.

 Moore has not yet responded. Olbermann, though, most certainly did respond, and it did not reflect well on him, at all.

 He bickered with Mediaite's Tommy Christopher, continued to demonstrate that he didn't know what Assange was accused of, and though he did finally apologize, it wasn't the sort of apology that involved an admission of wrongdoing. (And Olbermann did say some complete nonsense, like this, that he ought to think about "retracting.")

 The horribleness of this entire public conversation is nicely described here by Jezebel's Anna North.

 To be fair, poor reporting led quite a lot of people to believe that Assange had been charged with some silly-sounding crime called "sex by surprise" -- that's where the whole "he's under arrest because a condom broke!" nonsense came from -- when in fact he is accused of, in Whoopi Goldberg's regrettable formulation, "rape-rape." (But to be fairer, the whole "the condom broke" thing means consent was withdrawn, which means that, yes, that's rape.)

 So, for the record, here is what Julian Assange is accused of, as per the Guardian, a newspaper that both Keith Olbermann and Michael Moore are most likely familiar with:

 Gemma Lindfield, representing the Swedish authorities, told the court he was wanted in connection with four allegations. The first complainant, a Miss A, said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange was alleged to have "forcefully" held her arms and used his bodyweight to hold her down. The second charge alleged he "sexually molested" her by having sex without using a condom, when it was her "express wish" that one should be used. A third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August. A fourth charge, relating to a Miss W, alleged that on 17 August, he "improperly exploited" the fact she was asleep to have sex with her without a condom.

 Obviously Assange should be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and it's also fair to say that Interpol never would've pursued this if it weren't for the fact that governments are cranky about WikiLeaks, and it's even fair to help him pay his bail, because everyone has the right to have someone pay their bail -- but his alleged victims should definitely not be presumed to be CIA spies or unreliable crazy feminazis, and no one with an interest in the story can credibly claim to be confused by the "strange" accusations against him. Not anymore. Assange was arrested on an extradition warrant connected to charges of committing rape.

 Olbermann's been accused -- on grounds both specious and not -- of misogyny before. He's made awful comments about women, but he also has mentored and championed fine female journalists. People are complicated! They contain multitudes. Olbermann himself seems to understand this: "I would suggest that the likelihood Assange is an asshole is about 157%," he wrote, long after that sort of comment would've been helpful.

 But instead of conflating people with legitimate criticisms of his statements/non-statements with people yelling at him for things he didn't actually say or do (it's Twitter, Keith, you can just ignore those people), and then dramatically suspending his Twitter account in a huff because of the "frenzy," Olbermann should probably just admit that he said some stupid stuff and apologize for real.

 This story has been corrected since publication to reflect that Assange has not been charged with a crime. |||||

– Keith Olbermann stormed off Twitter in a huff yesterday, after finding himself the recipient of a barrage of tweets condemning him and Michael Moore for defending Julian Assange. Olbermann had Moore on his show Tuesday to talk about the WikiLeaks founder, and nodded in sympathy as Moore declared the rape allegations against Assange “hooey.” That enraged readers at the blog Tiger Beatdown, who barraged the pair with tweets accusing them of being “rape apologists.” Moore hasn’t responded, but Olbermann did—and it didn’t go well. The host bickered with seemingly every critic (see Salon for details), eventually issuing an if-I-offended-anyone apology. Then he began blocking offending tweeters, and finally, when he could stand it no more, he tweeted, “I'll thus unblock all blocks, wish you all a Merry Christmas and I'll suspend this account until/if this frenzy is stopped.” Since then he’s posted one tweet—an innocuous congratulations to Larry King.


Article:

PRETORIA, South Africa (AP) — The chief prosecutor in Oscar Pistorius' murder trial said Thursday the double-amputee athlete's lawyers have floated more than one theory in a dishonest attempt to defend against a murder charge for his killing of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp.

 Barry Roux, front, the lawyer defending Oscar Pistorius, accompanied by his team, arrives at the high court in Pretoria, South Africa, Thursday, Aug. 7, 2014. On Thursday and Friday, both sides will summarize... (Associated Press)

 Oscar Pistorius, second from right, accompanied by a relative arrives at the high court in Pretoria, South Africa, Thursday, Aug. 7, 2014. On Thursday and Friday, both sides will summarize their versions... (Associated Press)

 Prosecutor Gerrie Nel made the allegation during final arguments in the sensational trial in a Pretoria courthouse, where the fathers of the Olympic runner and Steenkamp, a model and television personality, were in court for the first time since the trial began in early March. They sat at opposite ends of a long bench in the gallery.

 Nel said a criminal trial was a "blunt instrument for digging up the truth" but that he was confident of his case. He then said defense lawyers had argued that Pistorius acted in self-defense, fearing an intruder was in the house, but also raised the possibility that the once-celebrated athlete was not criminally responsible, accidentally shooting Steenkamp through a closed toilet door because he was "startled."

 "It's two defenses that you can never reconcile," Nel said.

 The prosecution has argued that Pistorius intentionally shot Steenkamp before dawn on Feb. 14, 2013 after a quarrel. The defense has previously contended that he fired by mistake, thinking he was about to be attacked by an assailant in the toilet and that Steenkamp was in the bedroom.

 In addition to the murder charge, Pistorius faces three separate gun-related charges, one of which stems from his alleged firing of a shot in a crowded restaurant called Tashas in Johannesburg, months before he killed Steenkamp. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

 On Thursday, some of the state's written arguments as well as transcripts of past testimony appeared on screens in the courtroom. One section questioned Pistorius' defense case:

 "Is it putative self-defense? Is it an act of sane automatism? Did he have criminal capacity to act? Or was it all an accident as in Tashas Restaurant where he had the gun in his hand and it purportedly discharged itself?"

 Because South Africa has no trial by jury, Judge Thokozile Masipa will decide with the help of two legal assistants if Pistorius committed murder, is guilty of a negligent killing, or if he made a tragic error and should be acquitted. The runner faces 25 years to life in prison if convicted of premeditated murder, and also would be sent to prison for years if guilty of murder without premeditation or culpable homicide.

 Earlier, Masipa told Nel and chief defense lawyer Barry Roux that they had only until the end of Friday to complete their final arguments in court.

 "Unless, of course, you want to work on a Saturday and perhaps Sunday, after church," she said, smiling.

 ___

 Imray reported from Stellenbosch, South Africa. ||||| Look back at our rolling coverage as the prosecution presented its closing arguments in the trial of Oscar Pistorius for the murder of Reeva Steenkamp |||||
What is a summary?

– The prosecution is laying out its closing arguments in Oscar Pistorius' monthslong murder trial today, with the defense expected to wrap things up tomorrow. Prosecutor Gerrie Nel, known as "the pitbull," began by ripping into Pistorius' claims that he acted in self-defense when shooting Reeva Steenkamp—who Pistorius says he thought was an intruder—and that he was "not criminally responsible" for the shooting because he was "startled," the AP reports. "It's two defenses that you can never reconcile," Nel said. Pistorius never once said the shooting was an accident because he "intended to kill," Nel said, per the Guardian. Nel noted that given the lack of imminent attack, Pistorius is still guilty of murder even if he did believe Steenkamp to be an intruder. Nel also drew attention to the contents of Steenkamp’s stomach, which indicate she ate hours after Pistorius said the pair went to bed, and other inconsistencies in the runner's testimony. "All these lies caught him up," Nel said. He also noted the defense never tried to disprove the claim that a neighbor heard a woman's raised voice an hour before the gunshots. As to the defense's claim that Pistorius' screams sound like a woman's, Nel said there is a recording of Pistorius screaming but the defense didn't present it because it doesn't support their version of events. Judge Thokozile Masipa will likely inform the court tomorrow of when her decision can be expected.


News article:

This “has worked for years in Latin America and Canada,” NATO chief John Fithian says — and could begin as an experiment in one U.S. state by the end of this year. “There are meetings this week about doing a test with a discount.” Although NATO has a state in mind, Fithian declined to say which one is being considered. He adds that studios have to endorse the concept. It makes sense, he says, because “our capacity is so unused,” which is why “we are looking aggressively at it.” Fithian says he can’t disclose much because so many decisions have yet to be made, and to avoid the possibility of violating antitrust laws by appearing to set prices. NATO “could never set what the discount could be … [it] would have to be a concept that this is the day in which theaters discount.”

 Get Deadline news and alerts sent to your inbox. ||||| If American movie-theater owners have been super hardcore about one thing, it’s ticket prices. No matter what the Europeans and Canadians do, no matter how many startups try to hack into ticket pricing, exhibitors for years have refused to budge.

 Until now.

 The National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) announced Tuesday that it’s launching an off-night ticket-discount experiment sometime this year. But rather than dive in, they’re carefully dipping a toe: Only one state, which hasn't yet been revealed, will host the program, and it will run only for a limited time.

 See also: 8 Top Apps and Services for Streaming Your Favorite Movies

 It's hardly a full-scale ticket-price surrender, but it’s still a notable concession. Theaters have been uniformly steadfast in their stance against ticket discounting; they’re fine to honor coupons and membership points for popcorn and Junior Mints, but if the sign on the box office says $14.95, it’s gonna be $14.95, from sea to shining sea.

 That’s largely because studios are promised a hard cut of each ticket; any discount would slice directly into the theaters’ take. Startups like Groupon and MoviePass, which set out to offer unlimited moviegoing for $50 a month, have tried to break through. But they’ve had only limited success, largely withering in the face of intense exhibitor and studio pressure.

 NATO Chief John Fithian announced the plan at CinemaCon in Las Vegas, where hundreds of movie-theater owners — from major chains like AMC to mom-and-pop venues — rub elbows with the Hollywood studios’ elite once a year. But what’s meant to be a love-fest has, in recent years, become an incubator for tension. Issues of shrinking theatrical windows (the period of time between opening day and digital homevideo release), studios’ secret premium VOD — and now discounting — have clouded the air at Caesar’s Palace.

 Fithian stressed that exhibitors in other countries have buoyed their bottom lines with weeknight discounts, but Hollywood has held fast to the old chestnut that doing so devalues movie tickets across the board. Let people spin the turnstiles for six or eight bucks on Tuesday, the thinking goes, and they’ll be less likely to pay $15 or more on Friday.

 Box-office grosses seem to soar to new heights year after year, but actual ticket sales have been flat or in slight decline, with ticket prices and premium formats (3D and IMAX) inflating revenues.

 Though the exhibition community likes to repeatedly say the sky’s not falling, it looks like some are ready to at least get out their umbrellas. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– Got a free weeknight? Going to the movies may soon become a more affordable option. Last year, US movie theaters sold 1.34 billion tickets, down 1.5% from the year before. And ticket sales dropped 11% between 2004 and 2013, the Motion Picture Association of America reported yesterday. To combat the trend, theaters are mulling a coordinated move: They may drop ticket prices on one weeknight a week, the Wall Street Journal reports. The National Association of Theatre Owners plans to try it out in one state this year. Which night will be cheap night isn't yet clear. The move would run counter to theaters' current habit of raising prices each year—a trend which has resulted in higher revenues despite lower ticket sales. Last year, for instance, the average ticket price was $8.13, up from $7.96 in 2012. Box-office sales, meanwhile, hit $10.9 billion, compared to $10.8 billion in 2012. The cheap-day system "has worked for years in Latin America and Canada," says theater owners association head John Fithian, per Deadline. Studios will have to agree to the plan, he notes—and the industry has feared that lowering prices one day a week will lead to people opting not to pay the higher weekend price, Mashable points out.