Elon Musk's Election Integrity Crusade

Scientists from the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have concluded that talc, a mineral that’s used in a whole bunch of frequently used products, is “probably carcinogenic”.“Carcinogenic” is a concerning word on the face of it – after all, it means the potential to cause cancer. But in this case, the experts aren’t saying that talc definitely has that ability.What is talc?Talc is a soft, naturally occurring mineral made up of magnesium, silicon, oxygen, and hydrogen. It’s mined in many places worldwide and turned into powder to be used in all sorts of ways, including in plastics, roofing materials, paper, and animal feed.However, people are most likely to have been exposed to it in the form of cosmetics and body powders like talcum and baby powder.It’s talcum powder that’s popped up in many headlines alongside cancer. That’s because talc can often be found in close proximity to asbestos, so there’s a chance talcum powder products might be contaminated by it.Whilst we know that asbestos is carcinogenic, with some manufacturers shifting to alternative baby powder products to avoid contamination, the cancer-causing ability of talc on its own has been somewhat less clear. What did the study find?The IARC put together a working group of 29 scientists from 13 countries to assess the cancer-causing ability of talc. They analyzed three different types of evidence: that coming directly from studies in humans; evidence from scientific studies in animals; and that from experiments like those using human cells or tissue grown in a lab:Human studies showed “limited” evidence – though there were many that found higher rates of ovarian cancer in people who reported using powder on their perineum (the area between the anus and vulva in females).Animal studies provided “sufficient” evidence – for example, research rats that had breathed in talc had gone on to develop a variety of different tumors.Experimental systems showed “strong” evidence – studies found talc could alter some of the key cellular processes related to cancer, like proliferation and nutrient supply.Combining this evidence, the team concluded that talc was “probably carcinogenic to humans”.What do the findings mean?The use of the term “probably” within the study is a deliberate decision – it means the scientists in the working group think there’s enough evidence to suggest that talc might have the potential to cause cancer, but not enough to say that it definitely does.Take the evidence from animal studies and those in experimental models like cell cultures; while it’s deemed “sufficient” and “strong” respectively by the team, the response to talc seen in a rat or a collection of cells in a dish won’t necessarily be the same as in an actual human.As Professor Paul Pharoah, Professor of Cancer Epidemiology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center told the Science Media Centre, “Extrapolating from model systems and animal models to humans is problematic.”That’s not to say that those studies aren’t useful – there’s a reason why they’re used throughout research and in evaluations such as this – but scientists can’t say for sure that it’ll translate to us.Then there’s the human studies – why was the evidence found to be “limited” when many of the studies the team looked at showed a higher incidence of ovarian cancer with the use of talcum powder?Though they looked at research where talc was believed to be asbestos-free, the key reason is that they couldn’t fully rule out that it was in fact present. Given asbestos’s well-known carcinogenicity, it wouldn’t be scientifically sound to conclude at this point that talc was the definitive cause of ovarian cancer cases seen in the studies – even if it actually was.The team also couldn’t guarantee that participants in some of the studies analyzed had used talc in the way they said they had – sometimes people misremember. Add to that the fact that there are plenty of other factors that can increase someone’s risk of ovarian cancer and it was concluded that “a causal role for talc could not be fully established,” according to a statement from the IARC.Also speaking to the Science Media Centre, Professor Kevin McConway, Emeritus Professor of Applied Statistics at the Open University explained: “Rightly, they aren’t saying that talc cannot cause ovarian cancer in humans. But they can’t at all be sure that in fact it does cause an increase in risk, at the levels of exposure that might happen in normal use of talc or indeed in any other circumstances of use.”“IARC’s experts still leave some room for doubt that using talc can ever cause human cancers at all, though they believe it probably can, and they haven’t pronounced on the circumstances under which it might actually increase ovarian cancer risk in real life,” added McConway. “There’s still a lot of uncertainty here.”A summary of the findings is published in The Lancet Oncology, with a detailed report expected to come in 2025.All “explainer” articles are confirmed by fact checkers to be correct at time of publishing. Text, images, and links may be edited, removed, or added to at a later date to keep information current.  The content of this article is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of qualified health providers with questions you may have regarding medical conditions.  

Anyone hoping the interview of President Biden by George Stephanopoulos of ABC News would allay fears by growing numbers of Democrats that the president is not mentally fit to serve another four years must be disappointed. When asked repeatedly and in different ways if he would take an independent neurological exam, Biden refused, claiming he is mentally fit and doesn’t need a test because he is tested “every day” and his test is “running the world.” The world is in bad shape, with wars and rumors of wars. Does he take the blame? Apparently not. Things are so bad that the Biden campaign was forced to admit it provided eight questions to radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders of “The Source” on WURD in advance of her interview with the president. In that interview, Biden accidentally stated that he was “the first Black woman to serve in the White House.” In 1988, Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison wrote in The New Yorker that Bill Clinton was America’s “first Black president” because of life experiences he shared with many Black people. That was said about Clinton. He didn’t claim a different racial or gender background. If Biden’s mental health is fine and assertions to the contrary are untrue, the quickest way to resolve the issue is to take a test. Not to do so suggests the president is covering up something potentially serious. The New York Post reported that, according to White House visitor logs, a top Washington, D.C., Parkinson’s disease specialist met with the president’s personal physician earlier this year. What was that about? Silence from those who know. It gets worse. Politico reports diplomats and world leaders preparing for this week’s NATO summit “are privately expressing acute concern about President Joe Biden’s age, health and ability to win the 2024 presidential election. These foreign officials largely favor Biden’s re- election and fear that Donald Trump’s return to office would damage the NATO alliance and cripple the war effort in Ukraine. But they have reacted to Biden’s recent debate performance with dismay and fear that Biden may be too frail to defeat Trump and lead a global superpower.” That pretty much sums up the concerns of increasing numbers of Democrats. How long will it be before we see a replay of that Republican Senate delegation that went to the White House in 1974 and told Richard Nixon he had lost the support of Congress and would be impeached and removed from office? There are plenty of nonsensical examples of Biden’s inability to speak coherently. Consider this one excerpt from the Stephanopoulos interview in response to his debate performance: “The whole way I prepared, nobody’s fault mine. Nobody’s fault but mine…I, uh, prepared what I usually would do, sitting down as I did, come back with foreign leaders or National Security Council for explicit detail. And I realized about partway through that, you know, I quoted The New York Times had me down 10 points before the debate, 9 now or whatever the hell it is. The fact of the matter is that what I looked at is that he also lied 28 times. I couldn’t, I mean, the way the debate ran, not — my fault, no one else’s fault — no one else’s fault.” Not even Google translate could figure that one out. And it’s not just his mental state, but his policies, chief of which is the open border, which according to a recent Center for Immigration Studies poll, is the top issue for most voters in this election. For the sake of his family, himself and especially the country, President Biden should have an immediate cognitive test performed by an independent physician with complete results released to the public. Anything less – or nothing at all – is unacceptable and puts the nation in danger by a president who increasingly appears incapable of fully performing his duties.

The Democrat Party struggle with Joe Biden's cognitive decline has caused the conservative CNN contributors to get firmer in challenging their CNN colleagues on the set. On Tuesday's CNN This Morning, Jonah Goldberg grew visibly angry with ex-Biden White House communications director Kate Bedingfield as she trotted out the Biden-he-can-do-it spin.  "I think he has a strong case to make that he is -- he is rallying the base of the party. And that's important as we move into an election where, you know, Trump's base is going to be motivated for him. You need somebody who's going to be able to turn their base out," Bedingfield said. "I agree with Molly [Ball] that things are fluid, but I think you're seeing that support solidify." GOLDBERG: "It's a wildly irresponsible bet. And the idea that it's a -- you know, I get the whole argument, it's the base, whatever. But like, the idea that Joe Biden, who's a total creature of Washington, D.C., political elites. He was a -- you know, he's been in Washington for over 50 years as a politician -- is saying that somehow, it's him versus the elites. It's gaslighting on a Trumpian level. BEDINGFIELD: He has been derided by the elites. I mean, look at, look at 2019. He was told, you know, he was out of touch with the base of the party. He could never be the nominee. GOLDBERG: He was told that by people running against him. Bedingfield said Biden has a "chip on his shoulder" about how Washington's intellectuals view him.  Goldberg grew angry enough to say Biden's presidency "means nothing" to him in terms of the next four years.  GOLDBERG: The past few years mean nothing to me, nothing to me. And it's a -- I think it's a crazy argument. You know, if financial markets -- financial firms are required by law to say past performance is not predictive of future results, that same principle applies to politics. If you watched that George Stephanopoulos interview and were reassured that he's up to the job, then I think you're kind of in a bubble, because that was not reassuring. And when he says, and when Democrats say, this election is about democracy and the future of the country; and then he says, well, if I lose, I gave it my best shot. Who cares? That is a terrible answer. He was clearly prepped, and he still gave a terrible answer. This spurred Bedingfield into her talking points:  BEDINGFIELD: To say the last three years mean nothing to you when you have a president who has gotten more done in a bipartisan way than anybody thought was possible; has gotten meaningful gun legislation done; has gotten an infrastructure bill. GOLDBERG: If he had a heart attack, you wouldn't say, well, what did the last three and a half years. BEDINGFIELD: That's -- that's like saying it doesn't -- so it doesn't matter who's president, because it doesn't matter what happens when this person is in office. That's saying that only -- the campaign is the only thing that matters. I don't think that's true. I don't think that's true. That's -- then it doesn't -- KASIE HUNT: Well, campaigns are about the future. BEDINGFIELD: And that's fine. I'm just saying, saying the last three- and-a-half years don't matter at all. GOLDBERG: Don't matter at all about whether or not he can do the job for the next four months or next four and half years. BEDINGFIELD: It's a very nihilistic way to look at it. GOLDBERG: No. Do you honestly think he can serve four and a half more years? BEDINGFIELD: I do. I do. GOLDBERG: I think that's lunatic. I really do. I think it's lunatic you think he can actually serve for four and a half more years. BEDINGFIELD, smiling: You're entitled to your opinion. HUNT: I have to say, this is a sharp, you know, version of the conversation that I know members of my family are having around dinner tables. And I think a lot of Americans are having this -- this play out right now as we speak. PS: In the 8 am hour, Goldberg tweeted (with the video clip): "Apologies for getting a little testy this morning."

The winds howl and the skies darken as Hurricane Beryl makes landfall, a storm of unprecedented force poised to wreak havoc on the Texas coast. The post Surviving this Hurricane Season appeared first on Survivopedia.

A parolee with a long history of crime has been taken into custody and charged after a woman in New York City was fatally shot, rolled up in a sleeping bag, and thrown outside in the trash, according to the New York Post.Chad Irish, 55, was brought in for questioning on Monday concerning the death of Yazmeen Williams, 31. Following the questioning, Irish was charged with criminal possession of a weapon, concealment of a corpse, and menacing. However, he has not been charged with homicide in connection with Williams.'She was the best sister I could have, and I love her so much.'At the time of his arrest, Irish was out on parole for a robbery he committed in the Bronx. The Post reported that he had been arrested 21 times leading up to his latest arrest.CBS News previously reported that Williams' family and friends decided to speak out after the woman's body was discovered on Friday on 27th Street between Second and Third Avenues.The medical examiner's office confirmed that Williams' cause of death was due to a gunshot to the head. At the time, the authorities said they had taken a person of interest into custody for questioning. While it is unclear where the killing allegedly took place, reports noted that the police saw video footage of a man pulling the bag on a motorized wheelchair.Following the atrocious incident, a memorial was set up around where the body was found, according to CBS News.Williams was about to take on a new job at the city's Department of Housing Preservation on Monday. Williams' mother, Nicole, said that "she was looking so forward to living, living her life. She got her degree in criminal justice. She went to Buffalo State University, and she wanted to go back to be a lawyer."Williams had two siblings, a twin brother and a younger sister."She used to always take good care of me, and she used to always be proud of me. She was the best sister I could have, and I love her so much. I just wish she could've stayed a little longer because I just wanted to grow up with her," her little sister said."You could always catch her on the Citi Bike. She had a beautiful voice," another person said. "No one would have a reason to hurt her like that.""Everyone she knew, she meant something to them," said a second person. "She just really loved life. I don't know who would do this to her.""We want justice for Yazzy," her mother said.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Republican National Committee's platform committee reportedly voted 84-18 on Monday to adopt former President Donald Trump's proposed 2024 convention platform, thereby confirming and outlining the GOP's "America First" priorities headed into the election — as well as what issues will be effectively discarded moving forward. RNC Chair Michael Whatley noted that the platform "is a bold roadmap that will undo the devastating damage that Joe Biden's far-left policies have done to this country, power President Trump to a historic victory in November, and Make America Great Again." From the outset, the approved 16-page platform signals a resumption of Trump's populist focus on supporting the "forgotten men and women of America" and shunning the "siren song of globalism." Extra to emphasizing the importance of reestablishing American borders, on-shoring manufacturing, securing elections, and clamping down on crime, Trump's party is apparently also gearing up to industrialize space and rebuild the country's dilapidated cities. "For decades, our politicians sold our jobs and livelihoods to the highest bidders overseas," says the document's preamble. "They insulated themselves from criticism and the consequences of their own bad actions, allowing our Borders to be overrun, our cities to be overtaken by crime, our System of Justice to be weaponized, and our young people to develop a sense of hopelessness and despair." "They rejected our History and our Values. Quite simply, they did everything in their power to destroy our Country," added the preamble. Noting that Trump's first term marked a positive break in this trend, the platform indicates that a Republican trifecta in Washington, D.C., would continue his earlier project of making America great again. Doing so will apparently involve making good on the following 20 promises, originally in all caps: "Seal the border, and stop the migrant invasion"; "Carry out the largest deportation operation in American history"; "End inflation, and make America affordable again"; "Stop outsourcing, and turn the United States into a manufacturing superpower"; "Large tax cuts for workers, and no tax on tips!"; "Defend our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to keep and bear arms"; "Prevent World War Three, restore peace in Europe and in the Middle East, and build a great Iron Dome missile defense shield over our entire country — all made in America"; "End the weaponization of government against the American people"; "Stop the migrant crime epidemic, demolish the foreign drug cartels, crush gang violence, and lock up violent offenders"; "Rebuild our cities, including Washington[,] DC, making them safe, clean, and beautiful again"; "Strengthen and modernize our military, making it, without question, the strongest and most powerful in the world"; "Keep the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency"; "Fight for and protect Social Security and Medicare with no cuts, including no changes to the retirement age"; "Cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations"; "Cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children"; "Keep men out of women's sports"; "Deport pro-Hamas radicals and make our college campuses safe and patriotic again"; "Secure our elections, including same day voting, voter identification, paper ballots, and proof of citizenship"; and "Unite our country by bringing it to new and record levels of success." The remainder of the platform elaborates on some of these promises while also committing the GOP to take other stands — against the creation of a central bank digital currency; against "Democrats' unlawful and unAmerican Crypto crackdown"; against taxpayer-funded sex change mutilations; for the development of artificial intelligence rooted in free speech; and for the restoration of beauty in public architecture and through conservation efforts. The platform also indicates that Republicans will support the establishment of a federal task force aimed at fighting anti-Christian bias "that will investigate all forms of illegal discrimination, harassment, and persecution against Christians in America." Whereas previous Republican platforms emphasized pro-life concerns regarding the slaughter of the unborn, Trump's platform reads like Republican realpolitik regarding abortion. While indicating that the 14th Amendment "guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process," the platform intimates that its application to the unborn is a matter for individual states to decide. The Republican Party moving forward will apparently only commit to opposing late-term abortion while simultaneously supporting access to "birth control" and fertility treatments. The Washington Post highlighted that the document also omits language from previous platforms condemning the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to grant homosexuals the right to "marry." Instead, it states, "Republicans will promote a culture that values the sanctity of marriage, the blessings of childhood, and the foundational role of families, and supports working parents. We will end policies that punish families." Trump noted on Truth Social, "Ours is a forward-looking Agenda with strong promises that we will accomplish very quickly when we win the White House and Republican Majorities in the House and Senate. We are, quite simply, the Party of Common Sense!" Senior Trump campaign advisors Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles said in a joint statement, "While Joe Biden and Democrats argue about who will be at the top of their ticket and have implemented policies that have raised prices on everyday families, opened the floodgates to migrant crime via wide-open borders, shackled American energy with red tape forced by Washington bureaucrats, and sewn [sic] chaos across the world through weak foreign policy, President Trump will Make America Great Again through these America First principles." The 2024 platform has been met with mixed responses. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), the chair of the platform committee, suggested it's the "best platform we've ever put forward." "I think we have a unified party behind President Trump who's our nominee and our platform reflects his views," Kevin Cabrera, an RNC platform committee member from Florida, told WISN-TV. "It's a stark contrast to the other side." Some in the tech space celebrated the platform's resistance to regulation and forward-thinking on space and AI. Jacob Helberg, commissioner for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, suggested it "sets a new standard for what a pro-tech agenda looks like." Gayle Ruzicka, a RNC platform committee member from Utah, told WISN there was no virtually no debate about the platform. "There was no committees. We've always had subcommittees where we can go in and work on a section of the platform. We can propose amendments, debate them, add them. Always happens — I've done it many times," said Ruzicka. "They didn't allow any amendments. They didn't allow any discussion. They rolled us." "I'm extremely disappointed that we do not have any pro-life language," added Ruzicka. "There are good things in this platform. There are a lot of things in there that I support. ... But I didn't vote for this because we've never had a platform — I've been coming to these conventions since 1992 and this is the first time we don't have a pro-life platform." While some pro-life advocates, such as Paul Brown, director of policy for Abolish Abortion Texas, similarly bemoaned the party's softened stance against abortion, others — including Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of SBA Pro-Life America, and Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project, have voiced support for the "common-sense promises" in the platform. — (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

French cyclist Julien Bernard was fined for "inappropriate behavior" during the renowned Tour de France for briefly stopping to kiss his wife and baby boy.It was just 15 minutes into the seventh stage of the famous race when a spectacular moment happened. The course was going through Bernard's home region of Burgundy when an ecstatic crowd of friends, family, and French supporters greeted him in a cinematic moment that caused authorities to part the seas of a cheering crowd. As he rode through the middle, Bernard stopped to kiss his wife and son. Bernard responded to a video of the event on X by saying "Sorry, but what was that? I love you so much," directed toward his family.It seemed that not every viewer thought the stop was such an endearing moment, as the international cyclists' union determined Bernard's actions to be a punishable offence.'It was a dream moment for me.'The Union Cycliste Internationale saw the act as "unseemly or inappropriate behavior during the race and damage to the image of sport" and fined the cyclist 200 Swiss francs, equating to approximately $223, Fox News reported.Bernard sarcastically responded to a screenshot of the fine, saying he was willing to pay the price over and over again."And sorry [UCI Cycling] for having damaged the image of Sport But I am willing to pay 200CHF every day and relive this moment," he wrote. — (@) Danish cyclist Magnus Cort responded to Bernard, jokingly saying he was lucky he wasn't also fined for kissing his wife on video during the race."What a joke. I guess I was lucky when they missed me a couple of days ago," Cort said."Actually that was two kisses so you should get double fines," Bernard replied.In a subsequent television interview, Bernard said that his wife had been organizing the moment with friends for weeks in order to get the timing right."It was really incredible. My wife has been organizing this with some friends for a few weeks now, and she did a really, really good job," he said, according to ESPN. "On a time trial, you have time to enjoy yourself. It's these moments that keep me going and cycling."Bernard told reporters that he knew something was planned but wasn't exactly sure what it was and that he was looking forward to seeing the plans unfold."It was a dream moment for me," he added.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The police are investigating after a 20-year-old college student was found dead in the Connecticut River over the weekend. The student attended Dartmouth College, and the authorities are looking into whether his untimely death could have been related to hazing, according to the New York Post.Won Jang grew up in Delaware and was a Beta Alpha Omega fraternity member at the prestigious college. He was last seen at a social gathering Saturday night around the Dartmouth boathouse beside the Connecticut River. The young man was reported missing the following day.'Won was always an amazing guy. I don’t think there was ever a time when I didn’t see him with a smile on his face.'After the authorities were notified, they searched for Jang for several hours, according to the report. His body was eventually found on Sunday about 65 feet from the river's shore, according to the Hanover Police Department's release on Facebook. Initial findings indicate that there was alcohol involved in the incident, according to witnesses.“Again, that’s all part of our investigation. We did receive an anonymous email this morning through the college that there may be some hazing involved, so we certainly will look into that aspect, too,” Dennis added, according to WMUR.The fraternity that Jang belonged to was disciplined for an undisclosed incident that took place last fall. The Dartmouth reported earlier this year that Beta Alpha Omega was one of four fraternities that had been suspended for violating community standards, several of which included alcohol.The report noted that Jang — a biomedical engineering major — had been participating in Sophomore Summer, which is a time for upcoming juniors to stay on campus and take part in a more relaxed summer course.Jang also served as a project manager at the DALI lab, a research assistant, and was a mentor for international students on campus.“Won was always an amazing guy. I don’t think there was ever a time when I didn’t see him with a smile on his face,” Jang's friend Kledian Marinaj said.“I had just been talking to him to make plans to grab a meal sometime. Of course, I was very upset when I first got the news, so I met up with friends around here, and we went on a walk talking about all the great things about Won, about how he makes jokes and makes people laugh.”Following the development, a spokesperson for the school said counseling would be made available for those who needed it.“Won wholeheartedly embraced opportunities at Dartmouth to pursue his academic and personal passions,” Scott Brown, dean of the college, wrote in an email to all those on campus. “He enthusiastically took part in the Dartmouth community.”The investigation into Jang's death is ongoing.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

For decades, we’ve been told pasteurizing milk kills harmful bacteria and reduces food borne illnesses. If that’s true, then where did all the hype around raw milk come from? Why is something that was long written off as dangerous suddenly the trendiest food on the market? Dr. Paul Saladino, a double board certified MD, the host of the "Fundamental Health" podcast, and the leading authority on the carnivore diet, recently joined Dave Rubin on “The Rubin Report” to explain the truth behind the controversial beverage and why the government seems to have a big problem with it. Getting to the Truth of the Raw Milk Debate | Paul Saladino www.youtube.com Apparently, raw milk is far safer than we’ve been led to believe, while pasteurized milk isn’t nearly as sanitary as the FDA claims. According to Dr. Saladino, pasteurized milk is produced in “not the most sanitary conditions.” “The udders are kind of close to the poop,” but “they know that milk is going to be pasteurized, so they don't really care if it gets contaminated,” he explains, noting that back in “1986, there was a huge outbreak of salmonella in pasteurized milk.” In contrast, raw milk farms take far more sanitary precautions. He points to the largest producer of raw milk in the United States – Raw Farm, which is based in California. “The folks at Raw Farm built a special barn so the cows have multiple showers” and “get the opportunity to poop and pee multiple times before they go to get milked, and their utters are cleaned; it’s very carefully monitored,” and “they test every single batch for contaminants,” Dr. Saladino tells Dave, adding that Raw Farms has “never had contamination.” As for the alleged health benefits of raw milk, “multiple longitudinal observational studies” have shown that children who grow up drinking raw milk “have lower rates of asthma, eczema, and allergies.” “Drinking raw milk probably is beneficial for kids programming their immune systems,” says Dr. Saladino, adding that “pasteurized dairy was probably something that triggered [his] eczema in the past.” Further, “a lot of people who are lactose intolerant can drink it because different bacterial cultures in the milk can change the gut.” So, if raw milk offers a range of health benefits, why is the FDA “denigrating it”? Apparently at Raw Farm and other similar farms, government agents have shown up carrying “long barrel submachine guns” demanding that they “dump all the milk out.” To learn more about what Dr. Saladino swears is a “war on raw milk” AND why raw milk has been connected to bird flu, watch the clip above. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.