Explore the vast range of titles available.

Americans spend more than $32 billion a year on dietary supplements, which do not require premarketing approval before they reach store shelves. Under current law, the FDA must identify and remove dangerous supplements only after they have caused harm. Epidemiologists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently confirmed what an astute liver-transplant surgeon in Honolulu already suspected: OxyElite Pro, a popular over-the-counter supplement, was responsible for a cluster of cases of severe hepatitis and liver failure. 1 Although patients began to develop severe hepatitis in May 2013, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), whose job it is to remove dangerous supplements from store shelves, did not learn of the cases until mid-September, 4 months later. By February 2014, the CDC had linked 97 cases, resulting in 47 hospitalizations, three liver transplantations, and one death, to OxyElite Pro. . . .

The drug company Mylan NV has agreed to pay $465m (£360m; €395m) to settle claims that it overcharged the US social healthcare program Medicaid for its anaphylaxis treatment EpiPen, a portable, single use syringe carried by patients who are at risk of life threatening allergic reactions. Sanofi will in turn give an unspecified share of its portion to another whistleblower, Ven-a-Care of the Florida Keys, a former drug infusion service that has made an estimated $280m from identifying false claims made to the US government and forcing drug companies to repay the taxpayer over $1.3bn.

Since 1953, the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has evaluated presidential nominees for federal judgeships, rating them as Well Qualified, Qualified, or Not Qualified. The ABA insists that these ratings are \"independent\" and \"nonpartisan,\" but high-ranking Republicans, dating back to President George W. Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, have challenged this assertion. To date, research published in journals of law, political science, and economics has largely supported Republican suspicions, finding a pro-Democratic and anti-Republican bias in the ABA's judicial ratings. Senators from both major parties have recently questioned the credibility of the ABA and have called for a federal investigation into the ABA's judicial evaluation process. In the words of Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, \"the ABA has to assess whether its ratings are going to continue to have the kind of credibility they had merited and deserved in the past.\" This Note takes up the question of the ABA judicial committee's nonpartisanship. It evaluates the ABA ratings assigned to nominees for the U.S. courts of appeals, made during the administrations of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump. This Note employs an ordered logistic regression model, it controls for relevant nonpolitical qualifications, and it finds no statistically significant difference in the way the ABA treated the appellate nominees of Presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump. Whatever was true in the past, today's ABA ratings do not exhibit a clear partisan bias in either direction. The ABA's judicial ratings favor appellate nominees who are legally experienced, regardless of the nominating president.

A federal antitrust lawsuit was filed against The Infectious Diseases society of America, eight insurance companies and seven physicians who have reportedly denied coverage for the treatment of chronic Lyme disease. According to an article in Courthouse News, the 28 patients filing the lawsuit claim that the IDSA guidelines have prevented them from obtaining more than a month's worth of antibiotics. [...]these patients have always existed and their presenting categorical list of complaints has also been consistent over time: the fatigue, insomnia, and musculoskeletal pain often seen after an infectious disease and well documented after Lyme disease are joined by symptoms all-tofamiliar to pediatricians - headache, abdominal pain, altered bowel function with concomitant school absence, social isolation and family distress.