<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: american civil liberties union</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'american civil liberties union'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22american+civil+liberties+union%22&t=%22american+civil+liberties+union%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:28:49 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Former Prosecutor: DOJ Keeps Pharma In The Dark</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902692&amp;cid=t_110373_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F-n8abnKML2w%2F</link>
            <description>In a recent memo to clients, former US Attorney and healthcare fraud prosecutor Michael Loucks argues that qui tam, or whistleblower lawsuits should be unsealed after 60 days. Why? The average suit remains under seal for about 13 months which, he maintains, is unfair to drug and device makers that remain unaware of the allegations.
&amp;#8220;Very few companies have sought to force the government at an early stage to disclose the False Claims Act suit. Thus, companies have defended investigations without the benefit of the discovery and litigation rights accorded litigants in federal civil suits and without the ability to correct any misconduct identified in the (False Claims Act) complaint, and have typically allowed the matter to be resolved on the government’s timetable,&amp;#8221; he writes,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902692</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:20:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902692</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>TSA: If You Object to Giving Up Your Rights, We Should Take a Closer Look at You</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4719880&amp;cid=t_110373_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F1aPkIMF85rM%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersTSA screeners and behavior detection officers may give you extra attention if you complain about security protocols (video at the jump). Former FBI agent Michael German sums up my feelings pretty well:
It&amp;#8217;s circular reasoning where, you know, I&amp;#8217;m going to ask someone to surrender their rights; if they refuse, that&amp;#8217;s evidence that I need to take their rights away from them. And it&amp;#8217;s simply inappropriate.
In related news, the GAO recently told Congress that the TSA’s Screening Passengers by Observation Technique (SPOT) is not scientifically grounded. The GAO testimony is available here.
More Cato work on TSA screening here, here and here.
TSA: If You Object to Giving Up Your Rights, We Should Take a Closer Look at You is a post from Cato @ Liberty -...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4719880</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 19:52:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4719880</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Whistleblower Suits Do Not Violate 1st Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653605&amp;cid=t_110373_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Figh8X5xxjNM%2F</link>
            <description>A provision of the False Claims Act that prevents whistleblower lawsuits from being unsealed does not violate the First Amendment and, therefore, the public&amp;#8217;s right to access the documents, a federal appeals court has ruled. In a 2-to-1 vote, the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld an earlier decision that shot down the argument whistleblower lawsuits should be unsealed after a 60-day period because this would allow the public to learn as soon as possible about corporate wrongdoing.
The rationale for requiring these lawsuits to remain sealed for at least 60 days is to allow the feds, who are permitted to seek extensions beyond that initial period, to investigate the allegations. During the seal period, the whistleblower is not supposed to discuss the suit or its contents. ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653605</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:55:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653605</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patriotism, Dedication, and Esprit de Corps</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4399500&amp;cid=t_110373_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FP8LrZTmuJoU%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiFrom a press release by Law Enforcement Against Prohibition:

[A] U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent&amp;#8230; was fired for saying in a casual conversation that legalizing and regulating drugs would help stop cartel violence along the southern border with Mexico. After sharing his views with a colleague, the fired agent, Bryan Gonzalez, received a letter of termination stating that his comments are &amp;#8220;contrary to the core characteristics of Border Patrol Agents, which are patriotism, dedication, and espirit [sic] de corps.&amp;#8221; Last week, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, Gonzalez filed a lawsuit seeking damages.

I know very little about employment law and have no idea whether the agent has a case. But just consider that even som...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4399500</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:15:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4399500</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should Human Genes Be Eligible For Patents?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4125281&amp;cid=t_110373_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FDM-zpZVqQwk%2F</link>
            <description>In a surprising move, the US Justice Department late last week filed a brief indicating the federal government does not support issuing patents on human genes by arguing these are part of nature. The friend-of-the-court filing was made in a closely watched lawsuit over patents held by Myriad Genetics on two genes - BRCA1 and BRCA2 - that are linked to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer.
Last year, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation sued Myriad, the University of Utah Research Foundation and the US Patent &amp;#038; Trademark Office. They charged that Myriad’s refusal to license its patents broadly meant that women who fear they may be at risk of breast or ovarian cancers are prevented from having anyone but Myriad look at the genes in question. Ea...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4125281</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 13:59:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4125281</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patents On Genes Are Struck Down By Judge</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3420754&amp;cid=t_110373_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FaaOWXNbIdu0%2F</link>
            <description>A federal judge struck down patents held by Myriad Genetics on two genes linked to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer, essentially challenging the idea that anyone can hold patents on human genes. The opinion (see here) is almost certain to be appealed, but may still have significant implications for the biopharma industry. &amp;#8220;This marks the first time a court has found patents on genes unlawful and calls into question the validity of patents now held on approximately 2,000 human genes,&amp;#8221; according to the Public Patent Foundation, one of several parties that filed the lawsuit.
In explaining his ruling, US District Judge Robert Sweet said he invalidated the patents because DNA&amp;#8217;s existence in an isolated form doesn&amp;#8217;t alter the fundamental quality of DNA as it...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3420754</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:13:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3420754</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patents On Genes Can Be Challenged, Court Rules</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2954796&amp;cid=t_110373_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Ffny5naJ4Guc%2F</link>
            <description>A federal district court ruled today that patients and scientists can challenge patents on human genes in court. And the move allows a lawsuit challenging patents on two human genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer to move forward, according to the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), which filed the suit.
In a statement, the groups say the filed their suit because the patents are &amp;#8220;illegal and restrict both scientific research and patients&amp;#8217; access to medical care.&amp;#8221; They also charge that patents on human genes violate the First Amendment and patent law because genes are &amp;#8220;products of nature.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;We hope this challenge is the beginning of the end to patents on genes, which limit scientific research, lea...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2954796</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:21:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2954796</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>ACLU Challenges Patents On Genes Responsible For Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2405976&amp;cid=t_110373_136_f&amp;fid=37846&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthinfoispower.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F05%2F13%2Faclu-challenges-patents-on-genes-responsible-for-hereditary-breast-and-ovarian-cancers%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;#8220;The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (PUBPAT) filed a lawsuit &amp;#8230; charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer stifle research that could lead to cures and limit women&amp;#8217;s options regarding their medical care. Mutations along the genes, known [...] (Source: Libby's H*O*P*E*)</description>
            <author>Libby's H*O*P*E*</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2405976</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:24:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2405976</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What I am trying to digest</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2349568&amp;cid=t_110373_136_f&amp;fid=35302&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FWhitePebble%2F%7E3%2FfUV9vjZinpI%2F</link>
            <description>Yesterday, we were in New York, and a copy of the Times arrived with the morning coffee. On the front page was an article about the following&amp;#8230;
National Security &amp;#8212; The Torture Memos:
In response to a longstanding American Civil Liberties Union Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Obama administration yesterday released four Bush-era legal memos dating back to 2002 and 2005 that provide legal justifications for the CIA to torture al-Qaeda detainees.
The chart that was included with the article was both mind-numbing, and strewn with bits of unintentional absurdity. I mean, what about
Medical and psychological personnel are physically present or otherwise observing whenever this technique is applied (as they are with any interrogation technique involving physical contact with th...</description>
            <author>white pebble</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2349568</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:09:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2349568</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Genetic Modification to Control the Forces of Nature</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=583209&amp;cid=t_110373_87_f&amp;fid=34867&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thediabetesblog.com%2F2007%2F05%2F01%2Fgenetic-modification-to-control-the-forces-of-nature%2F</link>
            <description>Filed under: Type 1, Type 2, Childhood, Adult Onset, Lifestyle, Drugs, Research, OpinionIt's logical that the Nation is up-in-arms about putting genetically modified meats and produce on the shelves in grocery stores and getting due diligence from the government for it. It makes a lot of sense to test something you will use to fuel your body before it is permitted to penetrate the market. So how did genetically modified human insulin overtake the market again? Oh - there must not be any side effects like a diabetes epidemic or something crazy like that, right?
But I digress on the topic in honor of springtime, when &quot;love is in the air&quot;. As we all know, love is one of the strongest forces of nature. So is it fair that it went unnoticed by the FDA that human synthetic insulin results in a lo...</description>
            <author>The Diabetes Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=583209</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">583209</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Stem Cell Research Bill - Government through Guilt</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=525458&amp;cid=t_110373_87_f&amp;fid=34867&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thediabetesblog.com%2F2007%2F04%2F06%2Fstem-cell-research-bill-government-through-guilt%2F</link>
            <description>Filed under: Type 1, Type 2, Childhood, Adult Onset, Lifestyle, Drugs, Research, Daily News, Events, Opinion, SupportThe JDRF Government Relations would like to encourage all diabetics to take action and let your Senators know that you want them to support the Senate Bill 5 (S.5) - the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Of course, if you do not support this bill you are in no way expected to do any of the following - but for the sake of enlightenment, I invite you to read on. 
This bill is similar to H.R. 3, which passed the U.S. House in January and H.R. 810, which passed both the House and the Senate last year. This legislation will allow federally funded researchers to use additional stem cell lines for their research.
If you wish to take action, and let your Senators know that you sup...</description>
            <author>The Diabetes Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=525458</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">525458</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

