Month: January 2017

Posted on

The Gist - Unpacking Peanuts

The National Institutes of Health used to have blanket advice for parents: Don’t give peanuts or peanut products to children under the age of 4. The result? Between 2003 and 2014, it seems likely more Americas were killed by bad advice about peanuts than by acts of terrorism. Why did it take so long to change these guidelines? Marion Nestle says we know very little about the science of food allergies. She’s the author of Food Politics.  In the Spiel, explaining hacking in a way even Donald Trump would understand.    Sponsors:  What happens to our digital lives when we’re gone? LifeAfter, a new series from General Electric Podcast Theater and Panoply, the creators of last year’s award-winning The Message, explores these very questions. Listen and download LifeAfter wherever you find your podcasts.

Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Posted on

More or Less: Behind the Stats - WS More or Less: Should we really be drinking eight glasses of water a day?

How much water should you be drinking? There?s some age-old advice that suggests you should be drinking eight ounces (230 ml) eight times a day. Some people even advise you should be drinking this on top of what you normally drink. There is lots of advice out there but how do you know when you?ve had enough or if you?re drinking too much. With help from Professor Stanley Goldfarb from the University of Pennsylvania, Wesley Stephenson finds out.

(Image: Hand holding a glass of water. Credit: Charlotte Ball/PA Wire)

Posted on

Opening Arguments - OA32: Phil Ivey’s Gambling Winnings (with guest Chris Kristofco)

Today's episode begins with a question from Adrien Thuren about the minimum wage.  How come restaurants can seemingly pay wait staff less than minimum wage?  And if that's legal, why don't other industries don't start paying their employees less than minimum wage too?  Andrew tells us why or why not. For our main segment, we bring back guest Chris Kristofco from OA6.  In addition to being an ex-lawyer and current-day blogger about the Green Bay Packers, Chris is also a casino employee and former dealer.  He joins us to help break down the recent verdict in federal court in New Jersey requiring Phil Ivey to pay back $10.1 million to the Atlantic City Borgata casino. Next, "Breakin' Down the Law" returns with a segment that explains the difference between a "lawyer" and an "attorney."  Be honest -- you didn't know the answer, either, did you?? Finally, we end with Thomas Takes the Bar Exam, where Thomas tackles question #5 about garnishment of wages.  For every episode going forward, TTTBE will give you a new question on Friday, followed by the answer on Tuesday.  And remember that you can play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and quoting the tweet that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Show Notes & Links
  1. If you like football, and you love (or hate!) the Packers, you should listen to Chris Kristofco's excellent podcast, Titletown Sound Off.
  2. If you missed Chris's first appearance way back on OA6, you should go back and listen to his predictions about the "pending NFL apocalypse," and you'll understand why we hold his feet to the fire on this return visit.
  3. This is the Washington Post article explaining the Ivey verdict, based on the recent damage ruling.
  4. And this is the full text of the October decision by the federal court on liability, which mostly went unnoticed even though it decided the key issue in the Borgata's favor.
  5. Finally, this link contains a graphic representation of the purple Gemaco cards that were the subject of the suit as well as the "flaw" exploited by Ivey.
Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com
Posted on

The Gist - The Paradox of Shaving

New Yorker writer Maria Konnikova returns for another round of everyone’s favorite game, “Is That Bulls--t?” Konnikova takes on a long-held theory about hair growth: The more often you shave, the faster it grows back. Konnikova’s most recent book is The Confidence Game.  In the Spiel, the Megyn Kelly backlash begins.    Sponsors:  ZipRecruiter. Post your job listing to all the top job sites with a single click. Try it for free by going to ZipRecruiter.com/gist.

Harry’s. Get the smooth shave you deserve. Right now Harry’s is giving away their shave set for free when you sign up. All you have to cover is the shipping. Go to Harrys.com, enter code gist at checkout and you’ll also get one of their post-shave balms for free.

Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Posted on

The Gist - Mara Wilson’s Post–Child Star Life

Mara Wilson became iconic in the 1990s, but she hasn’t appeared in a film since the year 2000. In her memoir Where Am I Now? Wilson explores the joys and difficulties of her life after child stardom. Mara’s book was recently named one of the best of 2016 by NPR.

Sponsors:

Betterment, the largest automated investing service. Get up to six months of investing FREE when you go to Betterment.com/gist.

What happens to our digital lives when we’re gone? LifeAfter, a new series from GE Podcast Theater and Panoply, the creators of last year’s award-winning The Message, explores these very questions. Listen and download LifeAfter wherever you find your podcasts.

Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus.

Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Posted on

SCOTUScast - Venezuela v. Helmerich & Payne International – Post-Argument SCOTUScast

On November 2, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Venezuela v. Helmerich & Payne International. Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Company owns a subsidiary that, in 2007, contracted to provide Venezuela's state-owned oil corporation the use of Helmerich’s drilling rigs. When unpaid invoices to the state-owned company surpassed $100 million in 2009, Helmerich refused to renew the contract and prepared to remove its equipment. Employees of the Venezuelan corporation, along with the Venezuelan National Guard, blockaded the equipment yards, and then-President Hugo Chavez issued a Decree of Expropriation. -- Helmerich sued in federal district court under the expropriation and commercial activity exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Venezuela moved to dismiss, and the district court granted the motion with respect to the expropriation claim but denied it with respect to the commercial activity claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, holding that because the expropriation claim was neither insubstantial nor frivolous, the district court should not have granted the motion to dismiss that claim--but should have dismissed the commercial activity claim because the subsidiary’s commercial activity had no “direct effect” in the United States. -- The question before the Supreme Court is whether the pleading standard for alleging that a case falls within the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s expropriation exception is more demanding than the standard for pleading jurisdiction under the federal-question statute, which allows a jurisdictional dismissal only if the federal claim is wholly insubstantial and frivolous. -- To discuss the case, we have Donald Earl “Trey” Childress III, who is Professor of Law at the Pepperdine University School of Law.