A group of 411 TV showrunners, creators and writers sent letters to executives at streaming platforms and other major Hollywood companies to demand better protections for workers in anti-abortion states. "We have grave concerns about the lack of specific production protocols in place to protect those at work for Netflix in anti-abortion states," they wrote in a letter to Netflix. “It is unacceptable to ask any person to choose between their human rights and their employment.” 

Similar letters, which were first reported on by Variety, were addressed to the likes of Apple, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, NBC Universal, Paramount, Lionsgate, Amazon and AMC. The signatories include well-known creators, such as Issa Rae, Lilly Wachowski, Lena Waithe, Amy Schumer, Shonda Rhimes, Mindy Kaling, Ava DuVernay and Lena Dunham. They're demanding specific safety measures for people working on productions in states that have banned abortion after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last month.

The group has demanded that the companies respond with details on their abortion safety plans within 10 days. Among other things, the writers want information on abortion travel subsidies, medical care for pregnancy complications (including ectopic pregnancies) and legal protections for workers who uphold a studio's abortion policies or help someone else obtain an abortion. They also implored the companies to immediately halt “all political donations to anti-abortion candidates and political action committees."

A Bloomberg report this week noted that studios are spending billions on productions in states that have banned or restricted abortions, though many were already filming before the Supreme Court decision in late June. Georgia, for instance, offers generous tax credits to productions, which has helped the state become a TV and film powerhouse. Last week, a law came into effect in the state. It essentially banned most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, which is before many people know whether they're pregnant.

Seventeen Republican attorneys general have urged Google not to limit the appearance of anti-abortion centers in search results. They made the demand a month after Democratic lawmakers asked the company to refrain from directing people who are looking up information on pregnancy terminations to such centers. The Republican AGs suggested that if Google obliges the request from the other side of the aisle, they may investigate the company and undertake legal action. "If you fail to resist this political pressure, we will act swiftly to protect American consumers from this dangerous axis of corporate and government power," they wrote in a letter to Google and Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai.

Many of the so-called crisis pregnancy centers in question have religious affiliations, as the Associated Press notes. Some centers have been accused of providing misleading information about abortion and contraception. Following a leak of a draft opinion suggesting that the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade, a ruling that ensured the right to abortion nationwide (a move that the court took in late June), Democrats in the House and Senate introduced a bill that seeks to "crack down on false advertising that crisis pregnancy centers employ to dissuade patients from getting the reproductive care they need, including abortion care."

"Directing women towards fake clinics that traffic in misinformation and don't provide comprehensive health services is dangerous to women's health and undermines the integrity of Google's search results," the Democratic lawmakers wrote in their June 17th letter. They cited statistics indicating that a tenth of Google searches for terms like "abortion clinics near me" and "abortion pill" included results for anti-abortion centers.

The Republican AGs took issue with the Democrats' missive. They noted that crisis pregnancy centers often provide services like free ultrasounds, pregnancy tests, sexually transmitted disease testing and parenting classes. "These pregnancy centers serve women, no matter who they are or what they believe," they wrote. "These attacks threaten not only those affiliated with the centers, but also the mothers in desperate need of the assistance the centers provide."

The AGs noted Planned Parenthood has acknowledged that crisis pregnancy centers "have religious missions" and “are faith-based organizations that oppose abortion." They claimed ceding to the Democrats' request would "[reek] of religious discrimination."

They went on to state that if Google complies with "this inappropriate demand to bias your search results against crisis pregnancy centers," their offices would investigate the company for possible violations of antitrust and religious discrimination laws. The AGs would also "consider whether additional legislation — such as nondiscrimination rules under common carriage statutes — is necessary to protect consumers and markets." They gave Google 14 days to respond.

Engadget has contacted Google for comment. Google previously said it will delete abortion clinic visits from users' location histories. Meanwhile, YouTube today started removing videos with unsafe instructions on how to self-administer an abortion.

YouTube says it will remove content that offers instructions on unsafe abortion methods, as well as false claims about abortion safety. Such content violates the platform's medical misinformation policies. YouTube says it will start taking down those videos today and ramp up its efforts in the coming weeks.

Additionally, YouTube is adding an information panel under abortion-related videos and above associated search results. The panel includes context and information from local and global health authorities, the service said.

"Like all of our policies on health/medical topics, we rely on published guidance from health authorities," a tweet from the YouTube Insider Twitter account reads. "We prioritize connecting people to content from authoritative sources on health topics, and we continuously review our policies & products as real world events unfold."

YouTube is taking the step after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a ruling that ensured the right to abortion in the country. Several states immediately moved to ban abortions after the court's decision in late June. 

The platform banned COVID-19 misinformation following the onset of the pandemic. By August 2021, it had taken down more than a million videos with dangerous COVID-19 misinformation. The following month, the platform banned content with vaccine misinformation.

Amazon has struck a deal to buy primary healthcare company One Medical for $3.9 billion. The provider offers in-person care at locations across the US, but perhaps of more interest to Amazon, it has digital and virtual care services. The companies said One Medical makes it easier for people to "schedule appointments, renew prescriptions, access up-to-date health records and advance health outcomes."

One Medical aims to "make quality care more affordable, accessible and enjoyable." It has 767,000 members, as CNBC notes, with 188 medical offices across 25 markets. The acquisition is subject to approval from One Medical shareholders and other closing conditions. One Medical CEO Amir Dan Rubin will remain at the helm after the deal is complete.

Amazon believes that "healthcare is high on the list of experiences that need reinvention," according to Neil Lindsay, senior vice president of Amazon Health Services. “We love inventing to make what should be easy easier and we want to be one of the companies that helps dramatically improve the healthcare experience over the next several years," Lindsay said in a statement. "Together with One Medical’s human-centered and technology-powered approach to healthcare, we believe we can and will help more people get better care, when and how they need it."

Over the last few years, Amazon has made a notable push into the healthcare market. It launched an app-based health service for its employees in 2019, which it later opened up to more companies. It also has a pharmacy service that delivers prescription drugs to Prime users within two days. The company opened Amazon Pharmacy two years after it bought online pharmacy PillPack. Last year, it announced a version of Alexa for healthcare providers.

Brain-computer interfaces have become a practical (if limited) reality in the US. Synchron says it has become the first in the country to implant a BCI in a human patient. Doctors in New York's Mount Sinai West implanted the company's Stentrode in the motor cortex of a participant in Synchron's COMMAND trial, which aims to gauge the usefulness and safety of BCIs for providing hands-free device control to people with severe paralysis. Ideally, technology like Stentrode will offer independence to people who want to email, text and otherwise handle digital tasks that others take for granted.

Surgeons installed the implant using an endovascular procedure that avoids the intrusiveness of open-brain surgery by going through the jugular vein. The operation went "extremely well" and let the patient return home 48 hours later, according to Synchron. An ongoing Australian trial has also proven successful so far, with four patients still safe a year after receiving their implants.

It may take a long time before doctors can offer Synchron's BCIs to patients. The company received FDA approval for human trials in July 2021, and it's still expanding the COMMAND trial as of this writing. Still, the US procedure represents a significant step toward greater autonomy for people with paralysis. It also represents a competitive victory — Elon Musk's Neuralink has yet to receive FDA permission for its own implant.

Earlier this summer, physicians at NYU Langone were able to successfully transplant pig hearts into two recently-deceased humans. The medical team performed the procedures on June 16 and July 6, using special pig hearts that were genetically modified to be more acceptable for transplantation into a human body. Both the bodies were donated by recently deceased individuals and were placed on ventilator support so the efficacy of the pig hearts could be measured more accurately.

The study arrives as the field of xenotransplantation — or the act of transferring organs from one species to another — is under increased scrutiny. The first person to undergo a pig heart transplant died earlier this year, of what scientists believe was an adverse reaction to a drug to prevent rejection. The heart also contained DNA associated with a pig virus. Since the incident, the medical community has called for more meaningful research on the subject, as well as better safety protocols. Meanwhile, the FDA is considering approval of clinical trials for pig heart transplantation in humans, the Wall Street Journalreported last month.

Both human subjects — a 72-year-old Navy veteran and a 64-year-old retired New York City teacher — were monitored for three days before being taken off life support. Neither heart needed any outside support and functioned normally, which researchers are seeing as a promising sign for future research. Despite the NYU experiment’s positive outcome, surgeons cautioned that much more research is needed before pig heart transplants can be a viable alternative for people with heart disease.

“This is not a one-and-done situation. This is going to be years of learning what’s important and what’s not important for this to work,” NYU’s Dr. Robert Montgomery told the Associated Press.

Owlet is giving tired parents new tools they can use to (hopefully) get little bit more sleep than what they're getting with a baby in the house. The company has launched the Owlet Cam 2, which uses AI and machine learning to decipher sounds from the nursery and determine whether the baby is truly crying. It sends parents notification through the Owlet Dream App when it detects sounds, motion or crying from the baby's room. The camera can also send parents video clips of sound and movement that they can watch on their phone anytime. 

The 1080p HD camera comes with the features its predecessor has, including 4x zoom, night vision, two-way talk and room temp reading. However, unlike the previous version that only comes in white, it's also available in Sleepy Sage, Dusty Rose and Bedtime Blue.

Owlet has also rolled out a new predictive sleep technology feature for its system that automatically tracks the baby's sleep and wake windows when used with the company's Dream Sock. As its name implies, it can predict when the baby might be ready for sleep and can let parents know through the Owlet app — it can even adjust the child's anticipated sleep window as they age. That way, parents can plan their own rest periods and other activities around the baby's sleep schedule.

Predictive sleep will be available to both new and existing Dream Sock users through a firmware update slated for release today. Those who don't have a Dream Sock can still take advantage of the feature, though, by manually adding sleep sessions through Owlet's app. 

The company originally sold its monitoring device as the Smart Sock, but it had to pull it from US shelves after getting a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While the FDA did not identify any safety concerns, the agency argued that it should be classified as a medical device due to its heart rate and oxygen level monitoring features. Owlet stopped selling the sock in the US last year to pursue the authority to market those features as part of the device's offerings. But company made it available for purchase in the US again earlier this year under a new name: the Dream Sock.

The Owlet Dream Duo that bundles a set of socks with a second-gen cam is now available for $439, but those who already have socks can get the the second-gen cam alone for $159. In the US, buyers can purchase the devices from Owlet's website, as well as from retailers like Amazon, Target, Walmart and Best Buy.

In January, doctors at the University of Maryland School of Medicine made history by successfully transplanting a pig's heart into a human. The 57-year-old patient may have died two months later due to complications from the experimental procedure, but the case has inspired scientists throughout the medical field to call on the FDA to expand the scope and scale of human-porcine transplantation research. During a two-day conference in late June, policy advisors to the FDA and medical professionals discussed the future of xenotransplantation and "most attendees agreed that human trials are needed to help answer the most pressing research questions," according to Nature. 

We've been stuffing pig organs into sick people since the early 19th century, but the technology has made rapid strides in recent decades thanks in part to the advent of CRISPR technology and more potent immunosuppressives. In 2017, researchers created the first human-pig hybrid embryo as well as devised a solution to potential inter-species viral infections. As of January, 2022, were implanting genetically modified pig kidneys into brain-dead donor recipients with great success.

“Our goal is not to have a one-off, but to advance the field to help our patients,” Dr. Jayme Locke, lead surgeon of the kidney study and director of UAB’s Incompatible Kidney Transplant Program, told the NYT. “What a wonderful day it will be when I can walk into clinic and know I have a kidney for everyone waiting to see me.”

Humans have also conducted numerous experimental pig-organ transplants into primates like baboons. But in order to safely and consistently do it with humans, researchers will have to test the techniques on humans, Caroline Zeiss, a veterinary specialist at Yale School of Medicine, told Nature. For example, doctors found traces of porcine cytomegalovirus (PCMV) in the heart transplant patient who died earlier this year and believe that it may have played a role in his demise, but they won't know for sure without further tests that a primate model — ones that can't be replicated in primates.

Researchers are only looking at “small, focused” clinical trials with “appropriately selected patients,” Allan Kirk, a transplant surgeon at the Duke University School of Medicine, told Nature. Researchers will have to answer a number of fundamental questions before the technology can be widely utilized, as well as determine the right mix of breeding and genetic tinkering needed to ensure that recipients' bodies won't reject them.

And while the decisions made during last week's meeting may not have an immediate impact on the agency's current stance on xenotransplantation, changes are reportedly afoot. The WSJ spoke to a "person familiar with the matter" at the end of June who asserts the FDA is planning to launch pig-organ transplantation trials in an effort ease the shortage of transplantable human organs (*angrily shakes fist at seatbelts*). There's no word on when such trials would launch as they are being handled on a case-by-case basis, the source said.     

The UK’s National Health Service has announced that it will test delivering vital chemotherapy drugs via drone to the Isle of Wight. The body has partnered with Apian, a drone technology startup founded by former NHS doctors and former Google employees. Test flights are due to begin shortly, and it’s hoped that the system will reduce journey times for the drugs, cut costs and enable cancer patients to receive treatment far more locally.

The Isle of Wight is an island two miles off the south coast of England with a population just under 150,000. Due to the short shelf-life of most chemotherapy drugs, medicines are either rushed onto the island or patients take the ferry to the mainland. This journey can take up to four hours, while a drone flight can run from Queen Alexandra Hospital to St. Mary’s Hospital in half an hour. Not long after and an additional pilot scheme will take place in Northumbria to see if it’s possible to deliver vital medical supplies at ultra-short notice.

It’s not the first time that drones have been used to deliver vital medicines faster than a conventional courier. Merck and drone company Volansi began testing the delivery of cold-chain medicines to patients in rural North Carolina. Similarly, drone technology has helped move blood supplies across Rwanda, deliver prescriptions to senior citizens in Florida and help with supply drops during COVID-19.

Similarly, the UK’s Royal Mail has tested using autonomous delivery drones to get packages to remote areas. That includes getting vital supplies to the islands of Scilly, Shetland, Orkney and the Hebrides. Much like the NHS trial, Royal Mail said that using drones would reduce carbon emissions and speed up delivery times, especially in far-flung regions where infrastructure costs are too excessive to even think about.

Vegan meal kit startup Daily Harvest has been hit with two lawsuits by customers alleging they needed gallbladder removals after eating one of the company's products, reportedCNN. Last month the company issued a voluntary recall of its “French Lentil + Leek Crumbles” dish following multiple claims of gastrointestinal and liver from consumers. The first lawsuit was filed by Carol Ann Ready, an Oklahoma woman who is suing the company in the federal court for the Southern District of New York. Ready purchased and ate lentil crumbles from Daily Harvest on two separate occasions in May, both of which both of which resulted in trips to the emergency room. The second of these was a four-day stay, which ended with Ready's physician recommending gallbladder removal. 

Attorneys for Ready are asking for a jury trial, alleging that damages for the case exceed what the court normally allows. “Plaintiff has sustained serious personal injuries; suffered, and will continue to suffer, significant pain and other physical discomfort; incurred, and will continue to incur, substantial medical expenses; have missed, and will likely miss in the future, work and time necessarily dedicated to advancement in her profession; and remains at risk for future health complications with damages far in excess of $75,000, the jurisdictional threshold of this court,” says the complaint, obtained by Food Safety News.

Earlier this week, an Oregon-based content creator who claimed he also consumed the lentils and subsequently had to have his gallbladder removed filed a personal injury lawsuit against Daily Harvest. In a video posted to Twitter on June 21, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, Luke Wesley Pearson, warned his followers not to eat the lentil crumbles.

Daily Harvest still hasn’t pinpointed what may have caused the adverse reactions. "All pathogen and toxicology results have come back negative so far, but we're continuing to do extensive testing so we can get to the bottom of this. Everyone who has been affected deserves an answer, and we are committed to making this right,” the company said in a statement to CNN.

Yesterday the FDA announced a formal investigation into the outbreak, in an effort to determine the cause. In a blog post, Daily Harvest said it received approximately 470 reports from customers who suffered adverse reactions after eating the product.