Mediaboss Marketing

Former President Barack Obama falsely claimed thatLets Move,an initiative offormer First Lady Michelle Obama, helped bring down Americas obesity rates for our youngest kids for the first time in 30 years. In fact, research shows the obesity rate for 2- to 5-year-olds has been decreasing since 2004 long beforethe initiative began.

Its true that the obesity rate for young children continued to decline afterthe first lady launched Lets MoveinFebruary 2010, but theres no evidence that it contributed to that decline.

Obama made his claimat Seeds and Chips, a global food innovation summitthat took place in Milan, Italy, between May 8 and May 11.

President Obama, May 9: By working with schools, businesses and local leaders across America, Lets Move actually helped bring down Americas obesity rates for our youngest kids for the first time in 30 years.

We reached out to President Obamas spokesman, Kevin Lewis, for support for Obamas recentclaims. Over the phone, Lewis said Lets Move isnt still active but the mission continues through partnerships and relationships developed during the Obama Administration.

He alsopointed outthat Obama said Lets Move helped reduce obesity rates among 2- to 5-year-oldsin the United States, not that the initiativewas completely responsible for the drop. When we asked for proof that it helped, he said he wouldprovide some by email, but has yet to do so.

When research reporting a decline in the obesity rate of 2- to 5-year-olds was released in 2014, the White House put out a press release quoting the first lady. Though she was excited to see that rates had declined over 10 years, she didnt attribute the decline directly to Lets Move.

Michelle Obama, Feb. 26, 2014: I couldnt be more excited by the news that obesity rates for 2-5 year olds declined by 43% over the last 10 years. Progress of this magnitude can only be explained by the leadership and hard work we are seeing across this country.

Experts told us there is no evidence the initiativedirectly influenced childhood obesity rates.

The former first lady launched Lets Move with the goalof solving the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation. The initiatives programsaimed toensure that 60 minutes of physical activity [per] day is the norm in K-12 schools across the country and to encourage schools to incorporatesalad bars into lunches, among other goals.

As for achievements, according to the initiatives archived website, Lets Move [i]ncreased access to fruits and vegetables byproviding 3 million students with a salad bar, for example. Reaching over 12 million kids, the initiativealso equipped schools with a customized action plan to increase physical activity among children, the website says.

In unisonwith the initiatives launch in 2010,President Obama signed a memorandum toestablisha Task Force onChildhood Obesity. In a May 2010 report, the task force outlineda planthat aimed toreduce the U.S. childhood obesity rate to5 percent by 2030.

But since the launch of Lets Move, the obesity rate for all children aged 2 to 19 has remained stable. Between2009 and 2014, the obesity rate for 2 to 19 year olds hashovered around 17 percent, up from 10 percent for children surveyed in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Since the 1970s the percentage of U.S. children with obesity has more than tripled, reports theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.

Michele Polacsek,a childhood obesity expert at the University of New England in Maine, told us by email that a diet including more sugary drinks likely played a notable rolein the rise in obesity for both children and adults.

Liquid calories are especially harmful because they dont displace other calories in our diet, she explained. A 200 calorie drink doesnt make a person feel full the way a solid food 200 calories would.

According to the CDC, [m]any factors contribute to childhood obesity, such as genetics, the speed of an individuals metabolism, eating behaviors and quantity of physical activity. Children with obesity are at a higher risk for other chronic health conditions, such as asthma and type 2 diabetes, says the CDC. They are alsomore likely to suffer from depression.

Unlikethe trend for children ages 2 to 19, some research hasshown a declining trend since 2004 in theobesity rate for children between 2 and 5 years old. In other words, thattrend began before the launch of Lets Move.

In a paper published in theJournal of the American Medical Association,Cynthia L.Ogden, an epidemiologist at the CDC, and others reported that the obesity rate was 7.2 percent for 2- to 5-year-olds surveyed between 1988 and 1994. This rate peaked at 13.9 percent for kids surveyed between 2003 and 2004.

The first decline in the obesity rate for 2- to 5-year-olds in more than a decade occurred between 2005 and 2006, when the rate dropped to 10.7 percent from 13.9 percent in 2003-2004.

Since the launch of Lets Move, the rate has fluctuated dropping to 8.4 percent between 2011 and 2012 and rising to 9.4 percent for the childrensurveyed between 2013 and 2014. However,Ogden told us by email that the estimates for 2-5 year olds in 2011-2012 and 2013-2014 are not statistically different from each other.

What does statistically different mean?

Ogden and her group estimated the obesity rate for the U.S. population of 2- to 5-year-olds as a whole based on a sample of children in that age range. The obesity rate for the 2011 to 2012 survey sample group, for example, is8.4 percent.

For the population as a whole, the researchers can only estimate the rate withina range, which they call a confidence interval. The range for the 2011 to 2012 survey period, for example, is 5.8 to 11.7 percent.

This means Ogden and her group canconfidently say that the entire 2 to 5 year old populations obesity rate falls within that range, based on their analysis of the sample group. And the ranges for the 2011 to 2012 and 2013 to 2014 survey periods arent all that different from one another.

Overall, the researchers concluded the obesity rate for 2- to 5-year-olds rose steadily until it peaked in 2003 to 2004, and then began to decline.

ButMichael Goran, an expert in childhood obesity at the University of Southern California, isnt completely convinced by these numbers.

There has not been a consistent fall in obesity levels and levels tend to fluctuate from year to year, hetold us by email. We need to see a consistent change to make any more definitive conclusions.

Goran addedthere is no way to directly link/draw a line between what Lets Move did and changes in the obesity rate,as Obama claimed.

Polacsek, at the University of New England, also told us theres no evidence that Lets Movedirectly affected the obesity rate.

Polacsek added thatit would be very difficult to tie Lets Move back directly to national obesity rates especially given that obesity is a multifactorial problem and so many other programs were working to impact obesity rates at the same time.

Polacsek held backfrom making a definitive claim onwhether or nottheres a solid decliningtrend in obesity rates for 2- to 5-year-olds. But she did acknowledge that obesity prevalence percentagesfor 2- to 5-year-oldsjump around quite a bit. The number of participants for each survey period are actually pretty small once they are broken down by age, she explained, and thesmaller the numbers in analysesthe more likely they are to jump around. This means that Ogdens analysis is most useful when looking at multi-year trends but no conclusions should be drawn from one data point to the next, added Polacsek.

However, the CDC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture does have some additional evidence supportinga downward trend.

Researchers at these agencies looked at obesity trends from 2000 to 2014 forchildren ages 2 to 4 years old from low-income families who participated in theSpecial Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. This program provides food, health care referrals, and nutrition education to women and children under 5.

The researchersfound that the obesity rates decreased from 15.9 percent in 2010 to 14.5 percent in 2014. However, thats still above the 2000 rate, which was 14 percent.

The report adds that, Local, state, and national obesity initiatives, such as Lets Move, might be contributing to the modest declines in obesity by raising awareness of the problem of childhood obesity. But the report provides no definitive support.

Its also worth mentioning that its unclear whether or not programs started under Lets Move will continueunder the Trump administration.

In December 2010, Obama signed into lawtheHealthy Hunger-Free Kids Act, which mandated the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to update the meal patterns and nutrition standards for the school lunch program with the aim of reducing childhood obesity. In January 2012, the USDA finalized a rule that requires most schools to increase the availability of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in school meals, among other things.

But earlier this month, USDASecretary Sonny Perdue signed a proclamation thatbegins the process of restoring local control of guidelines on whole grains, sodium, and milk for school lunches. This includes allowing states to exempt schools from having to provide whole-grain products and beginning the regulatory process to allow schools to provide 1 percent flavored milk, which has added sugars.

Lets Movemay havecontributed to adecline in the obesity rate of young children, but theres no evidence of it, as Obama claimed. Experts say this would be a hard to measure, given that childhood obesity is a multifactorial problem.

Editors Note: SciCheck is made possible by a grant from the Stanton Foundation.

Share the Facts

2017-05-12 22:32:12 UTC

7

1

11

FactCheck.org Rating:

False

Lets Move actually helped bring down Americas obesity rates for our youngest kids for the first time in 30 years.

Barack Obama

Former President

Speech in Milan, Italy

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

2017-05-09

Continue reading here:
Obama on Childhood Obesity Rates - FactCheck.org

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

I know one other senator whos already confided to me that he was surveilled by the Obama administration, including his phone calls, he told Fox News on Wednesday.

So when this all comes out, if there are political figures from the opposition party, its a story bigger than any of the allegations with regard to Russian collusion, he said.

Earlier this month, Paul announced that sources have told him that he has been surveilled by the Obama administration, and that he has requested information from the White House and the congressional intelligence committees on whether he has ever been surveilled, unmasked, or searched for in intelligence reports.

Its about your own government spying on the opposition party, that would be enormous if true, he said. I dont know the truth. Weve asked the intel committees, House and Senate, and Ive also asked the White House, because there is this whole discussion of Susan Rice unmasking people, he said.

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was fired in February, after a phone call he had with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post.

Listening in on an Americans phone calls is illegal without a warrant, but it can happen legally during surveillance of a foreign target. If Americans are caught up in surveillance of a foreign target, their identities are supposed to be masked, or concealed.

However, U.S. officials can request to have their names unmasked if it is necessary to understanding the context of the communications, with the approval of the agency conducting the surveillance.

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper revealed that last year, 1,934 Americans names were unmasked.

Last month it was reported that Susan Rice had unmasked Trump campaign officials which she has not denied, but only claimed that it was not illegal.

There was no reason for her to unmask people. Hers was not a position of investigation. Hers was a political position. And for her to get involved with unmasking Trump officials is alarming. If it happened to other people, its even more alarming, he said.

But were going to try to get to the bottom of this. And its a very secret world. You have to realize that its a world so secret most members of Congress are never allowed.

Read more:
Rand Paul: Another Senator Was Surveilled by the Obama Administration - Breitbart News

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

by Micah J. Fleck

According to Rare:

Sen. Rand Paul has been one of the leading voices for criminal justice reform throughout his entire senate career, particularly of eliminating what he sees as draconian mandatory minimum sentencing laws. When Attorney General Jeff Sessions made it publicon Friday that he woulddirect federal prosecutors to seek the harshest sentences for non-violent drug offenders, the announcement drew a quick rebuke from Sen. Paul.

Paul added, Instead, we should treat our nations drug epidemic as a health crisis and less as a lock em up and throw away the key problem.

Sen. Paul wrote in a USA Today op-ed in 2013, Mandatory minimums most harm those lacking in the means to defend themselves. These laws disproportionately target the poor and minorities.

Getting rid of mandatory minimums simply means allowing judges to use their discretion in sentencing, rather than having to follow the current, draconian federal parameters that are totally detached from the very human situation at hand, Paul added.

Is this Senator Pauls new claim to fame? He has been at this issue for some time now, and it always wins bipartisan support. Not to mention it is objectively noble across the board. Word of advice to Senator Paul: if you run for president again Run on this, not on your weird, divisive black market baby parts mantra.

Action for LibertyBipartisan Supporteconomics of libertyinjusticeLibertarian-ishmarijuanaminoritiesrand paulRepublicansenatorwar on drugs

Follow this link:
Rand Paul: Sessions's New Drug Policy is "Injustice" to Minorities - The Libertarian Republic

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul is criticizing Attorney General Jeff Sessions for directing federal prosecutors to charge defendants with the most serious crimes they can pursue.

The new guidelines are a departure from an Obama-era policy that eased prosecutions of people with non-violent drug offenses.

In 2013, then-Attorney General Eric Holder directed prosecutors to avoid charging people with crimes that carry mandatory minimum sentences, which require judges to impose lengthier prison terms.

In a statement, Paul said the reprisal of the tough on crime policy isnt a good idea.

Mandatory minimum sentences have unfairly and disproportionately incarcerated too many minorities for too long, Paul said. Attorney General Sessions new policy will accentuate that injustice. Instead, we should treat our nations drug epidemic as a health crisis and less as a lock em up and throw away the key problem.

Paul has pushed for reforms to the criminal justice system, including reduction of mandatory minimum sentences on drug crimes, expungement of felony records and restoration of voting rights, though the proposals havent garnered enough support to get a floor vote.

However, Paul voted in favor of Sessions confirmation earlier this year. Sessions has repeatedly criticized the Obama administration for being soft on crime and accused the former presidents policies of leading to violent crimes.

Sessions policy amounts to a return to strategies conceived under former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who directed federal prosecutors to charge people with the most serious crimes possible.

Under the Obama-era policy, defendants who didnt belong to large drug trafficking organizations qualified to be charged with crimes that didnt carry long mandatory minimum sentences.

This week, Sessions issued a memoto Department of Justice staff ordering federal prosecutors to charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense.

This policy affirms our responsibility to enforce the law, is moral and just, and produces consistency, Sessions wrote. This policy fully utilizes the tools Congress has given us.

Prosecutors who wish to not pursue the most serious charges possible would have to get approval from a U.S. attorney or assistant attorney general.

Kerry Harvey, who was the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Kentucky until earlier this year, said implementation of the policy will depend on each U.S. attorneys office.

But on the face of it you would expect that the sentences, particularly in drug trafficking cases, would be longer, Harvey said.

Continue reading here:
Rand Paul Pans Sessions' 'Tough On Crime' Prosecution Policy - WKU Public Radio

In the less than three months since the race began to fill the vacancy in Montanas at-large U.S. House seat, political groups have spent millions of dollars in television ads portraying the Republican and Democratic hopefuls as beholden to out-of-state interests or out of touch with Montana values. Against that largely negative backdrop, Libertarian candidate Mark Wicks is presenting himself as an outlet to what he sees as growing disillusionment with the two dominant parties in American politics.

Most people just want to be left alone, to live their life, and thats the Libertarian principle. If youre not hurting me, youre not hurting anybody else, go ahead and do it and thats fine, Wicks said Saturday. People should be happy to do whatever they want, so long as theyre not hurting anybody else.

The 47-year-old rancher and Army veteran from Inverness was speaking during an interview at his Ugly Truck Contest campaign stop in Whitefish, an event built around his closing statement during the special elections only debate last month. He compared Republican candidate and Bozeman businessman Greg Gianforte to a luxury car that is only comfortable when hes parked at the country club with other luxury cars, and Democratic candidate Rob Quist to a little, half-ton pickup that breaks down easily despite having a great sound system.

Wicks sees himself as a work truck candidate, running reliably on small-government ideals and equipped with the tools needed to get the job done in Congress.

When I really started thinking about doing it was right after Trumps election, and we were seeing rioting in the streets. The country started looking like it was tearing itself apart, he said. It was getting very obvious that we need some change in Washington.

Hailing from a remote, rural community on the Hi-Line, Wicks said that his political philosophy entered his life from an early age. Following a violent Memorial Day storm that knocked out power to most of his agricultural community on the outskirts of Havre, he said the farmers banded together to prop up telephone poles and reconnect electrical wiring, so that the electric company had only to flip the breakers to restore power to a town that had been without electricity for five days.

They were just amazed that we went out and did that, Wicks recalled. But thats how people work together out there. They didnt need people from the outside.

Wicks describes himself as a Constitutional Libertarian, meaning his fiscal conservatism and liberal stances on social issues (pro-choice and favoring marijuana legalization) are focused through a constitutional lens that questions the federal governments right to regulate.

Notably, he feels that health care falls outside the purview of federal jurisdiction. But he also acknowledged that its a complicated issue.

Were gonna have to keep some Medicaid. Were going to have to work on that make sure its viable and protect these people, he said. ... One way or another, were gonna pay for this, whether theyre walking in and getting in the door and not paying their bill in the hope were gonna pick it up on part of our bill, or were gonna pay an insurance program to help them.

Wicks faces a steep uphill climb against the other two candidates on the ballot a Republican who narrowly lost a hard-fought campaign for governor last year and a Democrat who has campaigned aggressively across the Treasure State since his March nomination.

While Montana voters are historically more receptive to Libertarian candidates for federal office than the national average, U.S. House and presidential candidates still only attract 3 to 5 percent of the states vote. Last November, Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson received 5.7 percent of the vote in Montana, improving over the 2.9 percent he captured in 2012. And longtime Libertarian Mike Fellows averaged around 4 percent in his recent bids for Montanas U.S. House seat, peaking at 5.7 percent in 2010.

But Flathead Countys chapter of the Libertarian Party believes the states electorate feels increasingly under-represented by the two major parties, and that the appetite to take politics in a new direction is growing, despite the arguments that third-parties act as spoilers by siphoning votes away from voters second-choice candidates.

You kind of gotta bite the bullet and realize that your vote isnt for the opposition. If you vote Libertarian, youre voting for a Libertarian future, Flathead Libertarian Party Vice-Chairman Sid Daoud said Friday during the groups Liberty Think Bash event.

Both he and Wicks saw the outsider candidates inclusion in the April 29 televised debate, hosted by KTVH in Great Falls, as a victory in itself.

If theres two podiums there, you get one guy standing up and saying Im not him, so you should vote for me, Daoud said. If you get a third podium up there, then you have to actually stand for something.

While only about a dozen supporters milled around the Firebrand Hotels parking lot for Wicks Ugly Truck campaign rally, Larry Seydell represented the type of disillusioned voter with whom Wicks is hoping to connect.

Im just tired of it. The millions of dollars they spend on bullsh--, they could have done a lot of good stuff with it, the Columbia Falls carpenter said of the largely negative campaign advertisements hes seen so far in the race.

Seydell happened to hear Wicks during a talk-radio interview on Friday, and said he was struck by the message the third guy presented and decided to drop in on Saturdays event to meet him in person.

I was impressed. I think Im going to vote after all, Seydell said. ... Here we have a real guy with a real job and real problems like we all have.

Although early forecasts gave Gianforte a substantial lead over Quist, recent polls indicate the race is narrowing to single digits.

Some Flathead Libertarians at Fridays and Saturdays events worried that support for Wicks could erode as Election Day nears, with voters increasingly worried that a third-party vote will throw the election to what they see as the worse of two evils.

Longtime Libertarian and Bigfork resident Angie Killian said during Saturdays rally that her friends both Republican and Libertarian have pleaded with her to not throw her vote away on a third-party candidate.

I would rather see the Quist people vote for Wicks, and then maybe he could have a chance against Gianforte, Killian said.

Since casting her ballot for President Ronald Reagan in 1984, she was mostly a Republican voter until supporting Libertarian Gary Johnsons bid for the nations top office in 2012. For Killian, Republican stances on gay marriage, medical marijuana and abortion rights ultimately moved her to support the third party.

Id love to see a Libertarian in Congress. I think we need to start making breakthroughs to get away from the two-party system, she said. If we all voted for who we believe in, we might have a chance here.

Montanas special election for its statewide U.S. House district takes place May 25.

Reporter Sam Wilson can be reached at 758-4407 or by email at swilson@dailyinterlake.com.

Here is the original post:
Libertarian Mark Wicks stumps in the Flathead - Daily Inter Lake