Biden's Push for Universal Pre-K

For months, President Joe Biden has been touting his universal pre-kindergarten plan. 

Initially, Biden proposed free universal preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds in his Build Back Better plan, estimating the cost at $200 billion over six years. But the Build Back Better legislation was derailed by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin.

The president now hopes that Congress can pass pieces of the Build Back Better agenda, and he continues to make universal pre-K a priority.

Biden says the evidence is on his side. He says research shows that universal pre-K will “increase academic achievement in all children” and that it “equalizes the playing field” for students from underprivileged backgrounds.

FactCheck.org Deputy Managing Editor Robert Farley reviewed the research and talked to education experts. He found that there is plenty of research on specific targeted programs, but there isn’t much on universal programs. And the research that does exist, in many cases, is more nuanced and less optimistic than Biden suggests.

Find out what has worked and what hasn't worked in Rob's article "Biden Stretches Evidence for Universal Pre-K."

Reader: This is NOT a vaccine, it is Gene therapy at best, and DNA manipulation at it's worst. Quit hiding the truth! Your bosses are killing you and the rest of the World's population by plan. You are as good as dead mother f----r! 

FactCheck.org Director Eugene Kiely: You say, “This is NOT a vaccine, it is Gene therapy at best, and DNA manipulation at it's worst.” That’s wrong. 

As we wrote in "A Guide to Moderna's COVID-19 Vaccine," the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says on its website that the mRNA "never enters the nucleus of the cell where our DNA (genetic material) is located, so it cannot change or influence our genes."

We also wrote, in a March 2021 story, about the erroneous claim that the mRNA vaccines are “gene therapy.” As we wrote at the time, the FDA’s website defines gene therapy as a “technique that modifies a person’s genes to treat or cure disease.” Jacob Sherkow, a University of Illinois law professor who has written about gene therapy, told us that the mRNA vaccines don’t qualify as such. 

“The mRNA vaccines do not modify a person’s genes, i.e., their genome,” he said. “They’re transcripts of the virus’s Spike gene that get translated into protein and expressed in cells; the mRNA degrades afterwards. The genome remains unchanged.”

Likewise, the co-directors of the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development explained why the “gene therapy” claims are inaccurate, in a piece addressing vaccine myths for the Washington Post.

“[T]he mRNA delivered through lipid nanoparticles in a vaccine does not enter our genome. It becomes a template for cells to make compounds of amino acids on molecules called ribosomes in the cytoplasm compartment of the cell, outside the nucleus (where the DNA resides),” Dr. Peter Hotez and Maria Elena Bottazzi wrote. “Our immune system then responds to the new peptide, which resembles the spike protein on the coronavirus. Therefore, it’s not correct to say that the mRNA vaccines are equivalent to ‘gene therapy,’ as some critics of the vaccines have claimed.”

We are not hiding the truth. We are trying to share with our readers the most accurate information available to us. I’m sorry you find that so offensive. 

Wrapping Up

Here's what else we've got for you this week:

• "U.S. COVID-19 Vaccines Follow Conventional Health Standards and Protocols": Clinical and real-world studies have shown that the COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing serious disease, and there is a long history of vaccine requirements in the U.S. But a list of bogus claims, shared around the world in recent months, falsely attribute unique characteristics and requirements to COVID-19 vaccines. 
• "Biden Initiative Funds Drug Overdose Prevention, Not ‘Crack Pipes’": The Department of Health and Human Services launched a $30 million grant program in December to help “address the nation’s substance use and overdose epidemic” by reducing the dangers related to drug use. The program doesn’t provide funding for crack pipes, contrary to partisan claims fueled by a flawed assumption.

• "Mensajes en redes sociales repiten noticia errónea sobre ivermectina y ómicron": Una empresa japonesa encontró que en pruebas de laboratorio, el medicamento antiparasitario ivermectina mostraba un “efecto antiviral” contra la variante ómicron. Reuters ha corregido una noticia en la que “expresó erróneamente” que el medicamento fue efectivo en la fase 3 de un ensayo clínico con humanos. Usuarios de las redes sociales han repetido el error de Reuters, pero no han repetido la corrección.
• "Científico engaña sobre la eficacia y la seguridad de las vacunas contra el COVID-19 en niños": Las vacunas contra el COVID-19 aprobadas y autorizadas en Estados Unidos son eficaces para prevenir enfermedades graves, y los expertos afirman que los beneficios de la vacunación en niños superan cualquier riesgo conocido o potencial. Pero usuarios en las redes sociales han compartido un video en el que el Dr. Robert Malone afirma de forma engañosa que las vacunas contra el COVID-19 “no funcionan” y afirma sin pruebas que muchos niños “serán hospitalizados” y pueden sufrir daños cerebrales e infertilidad debido a las vacunas.
• "Últimos datos de los CDC: Los adultos no vacunados tienen 97 veces más probabilidades de morir de COVID-19 que los adultos con dosis de refuerzo": Hasta principios de diciembre, los adultos no vacunados tenían alrededor de 97 veces más probabilidades de morir de COVID-19 que las personas con la vacuna completa que habían recibido la dosis de refuerzo, según datos de los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC, por sus siglas en inglés). Pero un usuario de Twitter dio a entender erróneamente que la tasa de mortalidad de los no vacunados incluía a personas con una o dos dosis de las vacunas. Los CDC dijeron que “no vacunados” significa personas que “no se ha verificado que hayan recibido la vacuna contra el COVID-19”.
• "Mensaje en Facebook distorsiona la postura de los Institutos Nacionales de Salud sobre la ivermectina": Los Institutos Nacionales de Salud (NIH, por sus siglas en inglés) no han recomendado y la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA, por sus siglas en inglés) no ha aprobado la ivermectina como tratamiento contra el COVID-19. Pero un mensaje en Facebook sugiere engañosamente que un artículo publicado en el sitio web de los NIH apoya el uso de ese medicamento para tratar el COVID-19. Los NIH y la FDA han dicho que se necesitan más ensayos clínicos.