Connect with us


These Cannabis Vape Cartridges causes Deadly Lung Cancer- Sources Revealed

Steve Murphy



causes Deadly Lung Cancer

Cannabis Vape Cartridges sold with the label “Dank” is predominantly causing deadly lung cancer.  The name “Dank” is used for the highly potent cannabis widely known vaping cartridge in the marijuana economy. The ongoing federal investigation revealed the mysterious deadly lung illness caused due to the inhalation of this brand.

An image was released by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety on Sept 23, 2019. The image shows   75,000 THC vaping cartridges packaging “Dank” in Anoka County, MN. The illicit producers use the name of “Dank” on a box to lure customers easily.

The actual culprit has not found yet: INVESTIGATORS said

According to Investigators, so far the actual culprit has not been identified which reported illness in dozens of states.  However, according to officials patients mentioned the Dank name frequently to report about the illness. Like many people sick in Illinois and Wisconsin used cartridges sold in Dank packaging.

This is what the Associated Press has revealed about illegal vaping cartridges:

Wisconsin authorities revealed that an illegal vaping cartridge produces thousands of cartridges loaded with THC oil every day in two years. Even in the last two months, Minnesota authorities have seized nearly 77,000 THC  vaping cartridges. From all these seized cartridges some were packed in Dank boxes.

Similarly, in November 2018, some other authorities of Lorain County revealed about 4 packages. Those packages were mailed from California holding wrapped and sealed packages of Dank Cartridges.

According to a report of federal centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dank vapes are among the class of largely counterfeit brands.  The brand is available with common packaging that is easily available online.  The drug is used by the distributors to market THC- containing cartridges with no obvious centralized production or distribution.

The symptoms of inhalation injury include shortness of breath, fatigue, chest pain, diarrhea, and vomiting.

Steve Murphy has handled various businesses throughout his career and has a deep domain knowledge. He founded Report Door in an attempt to bring the latest news to its readers. He is glued to the stock market most of the times and just loves being in touch with the developments in the business world.


Hollywood reopen plan stops shorting of sacrificing ‘intimate scenes’

Michael Leahy



Hollywood reopen plan stops shorting of sacrificing 'intimate scenes'

Hollywood wants badly to reopen — but not enough to give up the hot-and-heavy make-out scenes.

In a 22-page document provided to the governors of New York  and California on Monday, Hollywood studios made their case for restarting TV and film production. And while the report is mainly filled with no-brainer recommendations, including that cast and crew members wear masks, wash their hands and social distance when possible, it also includes some headscratchers.

For example, while acknowledging that certain activities “such as fight scenes or intimate scenes increase the risk of transmission,” it stops short of vowing to put those activities on hold. “Whenever possible, performers shall practice physical distancing,” the report says.

And immediately after filming such scenes, “the performers shall put on their PPE and/or physically distance themselves.”

It also recommends keeping unruly children away — unless, of course, they are filming. And warns against the petting of cute animal actors when the camera is not rolling.

“As minors may have difficulty adhering to physical distancing, wearing PPE, and practicing hand hygiene, when not working, they should be relocated to a secure off-set location to the extent possible,” the report advises before turning to animal performers.

“Animals should not be handled by others except those necessary for shooting a scene (i.e., no petting, cuddling, feeding). All those involved in touching animals should perform hand hygiene before and after.”

The white paper — penned by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, a group comprised of Hollywood studios, as well as Dr. Daniel Uslan, an infectious disease specialist at UCLA Medical Center — was meant to be submitted several weeks ago. But it was held up several times by unions representing Hollywood directors and actors, sources said.

The white paper is considered an important first step for Hollywood studios to get back to work as stay-at-home orders begin to lift in the US.

“The white paper is the result of an industrywide collaborative effort made up of production companies, unions and guilds to provide governments with a set of guidelines and principles to safely resume production,” said  AMPTP rep Jarryd Gonzales. “The next step is for governments to review the set of guidelines for their consideration.”

Continue Reading


Facebook workers stage ‘virtual walkout’ to protest policy on Trump posts

Michael Leahy



Facebook workers stage ‘virtual walkout’ to protest policy on Trump posts

Working from home didn’t stop dozens of Facebook employees from conducting a virtual walkout in protest of Mark Zuckerberg.

Facebookers went on rival social network Twitter to announce that they were protesting the company’s policy of leaving Trump’s posts alone, arguing that they violate Facebook’s rule against “language that incites or facilitates serious violence.”

The workers “walked out” by requesting paid time off in Facebook’s systems and changing their out-of-office email response to say they were unavailable, according to reports.

The protest came after dozens of Facebook employees over the weekend blasted their employer on Twitter, with many specifically singling out founder and CEO Zuckerberg.

“Mark is wrong, and I will endeavor in the loudest possible way,” Ryan Frietas, director of product design for Facebook’s News Feed, wrote on Twitter about Zuckerberg’s decision to leave Trump’s posts up untouched.

Twitter on Friday hid a tweet from Trump that included the phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” behind a warning label. It explained the tweet violated Twitter’s rules against “glorifying violence” but was being left up as a “public service exception.”

Facebook declined to take action on the same message, with Zuckerberg saying in a Facebook post on Friday that while he found the remarks “deeply offensive,” the company decided they did not violate its policy against “incitements to violence.”

“Respect to @Twitter’s integrity team for making the enforcement call,” David Gillis, a Facebook director of product design, wrote. Despite saying that he understood Zuckerberg’s thinking in Facebook holding firm, he added that “It would have been right for us to make a ‘spirit of the policy’ exception that took more context into account.

Jason Toff, identified as a Facebook director of product management, tweeted that he was “not proud” of how his company was dealing with the matter, while another Facebook manager, Andrew Crow, said that he disagrees “with Mark’s position and will work to make change happen.”

Facebook officials on Monday said they are listening to the criticisms. “We recognize the pain many of our people are feeling right now, especially our black community,” the company said in a statement to The Post. “We encourage employees to speak openly when they disagree with leadership. As we face additional difficult decisions around content ahead, we’ll continue seeking their honest feedback.”

Despite the uproar, investors sent Facebook’s shares up 3 percent, or more than $6 a share, to $231.91.

Continue Reading


Twitter may need to boost fact-checking staff due to Trump feud

Michael Leahy



Twitter may need to boost fact-checking staff due to Trump feud

Twitter’s feud with President Trump may end up costing the social networking company, Wall Street analysts say.

By moving to flag and fact check tweets from the president, the Jack Dorsey-run company is opening itself to intense scrutiny of its practices in ways that could force it to expand the 1,500-strong content moderation team policing its platform.

“Any time a tech company — whether it’s Apple, Microsoft, Facebook or Twitter — puts themselves in the spotlight, there’s a lot of challenges that come with that as well,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives told The Post.

Ives pointed out how Facebook added more than 10,000 content moderators after it emerged that the company failed to crack down on Kremlin-backed sources seeking to sway the 2016 US presidential election, including by purchasing ads on the site.

“From a volume and user perspective, Twitter trying to do this with full accuracy would be like trying to count grains of sand at the beach,” Ives said.

Twitter last month announced that it would begin adding fact-checking labels to disputed or misleading tweets about the coronavirus amid fears that hoaxes were running rampant across the Internet. It then expanded these labels to include misleading content related to election integrity only after flagging a Trump tweet where he claimed that mail-in ballots are “substantially fraudulent.”

The label, which included a link telling users to “get the facts about mail-in ballots,” prompted allies of the president to question why similar warnings hadn’t been placed on other prominent Twitter users’ tweets, including a Chinese government spokesperson who accused the United States of causing the coronavirus.

Twitter only slaps misinformation labels on tweets it deems misleading if they have been generated by a public official. Everyone else just gets suspended or even banned from Twitter, depending on their track record.

But scores of public officials also use Twitter, including mayors, state officials, police officers, federal agencies — not to mention foreign leaders, experts noted.

“I think if you are starting to go down the road of fact checking, then presumably you’re going to need more fact checkers,” Third Bridge analyst Scott Kessler said. “This has been done before in various contexts and it definitely costs money.”

“For a company that seemingly is being pretty conservative in terms of the way that they’ve positioned themselves and they operate, this seems like it would be an additional obligation,” he added.

In a statement to The Post, a Twitter spokesperson said it does not foresee any additional hires to its team.

“We are staffed appropriately for the work. Protecting the public conversation is work that is done by teams across the company, including product, trust and safety, curation and Twitter Service,” the spokesperson said.

But analysts are skeptical given that Twitter’s content review operation is so much smaller than that of its competitors. Facebook, for example, has about 35,000 people working on “safety and security” — and Mark Zuckerberg has so far refused to follow in Twitter’s footsteps when it comes to scrutinizing posts by public officials.

In private comments from July 2019 leaked to The Verge, Zuckerberg questioned whether Twitter could expand it’s content moderation even if it wanted to.

“I mean, they face, qualitatively, the same types of issues. But they can’t put in the investment. Our investment on safety is bigger than the whole revenue of their company,” Zuckerberg said.

How large Twitter’s flagging process should be is not entirely clear in part because the operation is still a bit of a black box. Following the uproar tied to Trump, the company has said its decisions are made by a team of executives, including Twitter’s general counsel and vice president of Trust and Safety. Twitter CEO and founder Dorsey is informed before actions are taken.

Twitter has also revealed that its team was notified about Trump’s tweet by a third-party nonprofit partnering with its election integrity hub, and that the tweet ping-ponged between a slew of higher-ups until Dorsey eventually signed off on the flag.

When reached by The Post and asked for more details about its flagging system, a spokesperson pointed to a company blog post about exceptions to its rules and declined to give any additional information.

The blog post says that the only accounts that can break Twitter’s rules and not be suspended or deleted entirely are those from elected and government officials “given the significant public interest in knowing and being able to discuss their actions and statements.”

Twitter says that it evaluates every case “individually and in a way that accounts for context and history,” noting that “this is new territory for everyone” and that it has yet to set a precedent.

The San Francisco-based company also announced last June announced that it would begin flagging abusive tweets from world leaders. At the time, it pledged to use the tool on “rare” occasions when a tweet egregiously violates its policies.

With Post wires.

Continue Reading