Archive

2024

Browsing

Qubits, quantum advantage, gate speed — these terms could one day be as ubiquitous as AI or large language model (LLM). Quantum computing could become the next big thing in the technology space and, as an investor, it’s something you don’t want to ignore. Some companies, Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL) and Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) to name a few, have already dipped their toes in the quantum computing world.

While it may be many years before quantum computing is adopted into the mainstream, investors should take notice now. Some quantum computing stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are seeing their prices rise and, at their current price levels, it’s worth paying attention to their charts.

When reviewing the StockCharts Technical Rank (SCTR) Reports Dashboard panel on Thursday, December 26, we can see that at least four quantum computing stocks made it to the Small Cap, Top 10 category. This makes it worth analyzing their charts.

FIGURE 1. QUANTUM COMPUTING STOCKS ARE GETTING STRONG. The Small-Cap, Top 10 displayed four quantum computing stocks with high SCTR scores.Image source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

All four stocks — Quantum Computing (QUBT), Rigetti Computing, Inc. (RGTI), Quantum Corp. (QMCO), and D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) displayed upside momentum in October/November (see chart below). The SCTR score for all four stocks is close to 100, their 21-day exponential moving average (EMA) and 50-day SMA are trending higher, and the 200-day SMA is flat to slightly higher.

FIGURE 2. QUANTUM COMPUTING STOCKS. All four stocks are displaying similar price action. They’re all trending higher, have strong SCTR scores, and display bullish momentum.Image source: StockChartsACP. For educational purposes.

Overall, these stocks look ripe for a bull run and the price levels are attractive. The percentage price oscillator (PPO) in the lower panel shows momentum favors the bulls. Quantum Computing Inc. (QUBT) has pulled back slightly, whereas Rigetti Computing, Inc. (RGTI), Quantum Corp. (QMCO), and D-Wave Quantum, Inc. (QBTS) are at all-time highs.

If you want to gain broader exposure to the quantum computing segment, the Defiance Quantum ETF (QTUM) invests in quantum computing and technology companies. The Symbol Summary page provides more details about the ETF.

The daily chart of QTUM below is similar to the charts of the individual stocks above.

FIGURE 3. DAILY CHART OF DEFIANCE QUANTUM ETF (QTUM). This chart is similar to the individual quantum computing stocks in Fig 2. The advantage of investing in the ETF is it gives you exposure to more than one stock and other cutting-edge technology stocks.Chart source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

The Game Plan

Watch for a pullback toward the 21-day EMA or the most recent low, whichever is higher. A reversal from a support level with follow-through would be an opportune time to enter a long position. It’s worth creating a ChartList of quantum computing stocks so you can revisit these charts frequently.

So at your New Year’s Eve party, if someone mentions the words qubit and gate speed, at least you’ll know they’re talking about quantum computing.

Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional.

Travis Kelce will catch the rock. But will he present one to his lover? 

The hoodie is back. But how long will Bill Belichick be for Chapel Hill? 

Paige Bueckers will call her shots. But will she be getting them up in Dallas? 

A first glance at 2025 reveals a year that may zag just after it zigs, that’s about as hard to pin down as a former Green Bay Packer quarterback’s career plans. 

Stick with it, though, and you will be surprised – pleasantly or otherwise. 

With that, USA TODAY Sports reporters and editors offer up their bold predictions for the coming year, one heavy on the usual (LeBron discourse) and unusual (King Kirk Herbstreit?): 

2025 in sports predictions

(via USA TODAY Sports staff)

— LeBron James will retire: After turning 40, and finally achieving his dream of sharing an NBA court with his son Bronny, the future Hall of Famer will decide to walk away at the end of the season.

— Arch Manning will win the Heisman Trophy: And, in the process, become the first Manning to do so. (Archie, Peyton and Eli were all finalists at some point in their college careers but never won it.)

— Paige Bueckers does not end up with the Dallas Wings: Just as Caitlin Clark was the foregone conclusion to be the No. 1 pick in this year’s draft, Bueckers is the gimme for No. 1 in 2025. But Dallas is not exactly a prime WNBA destination, and Bueckers is one of the few players with the leverage to say she doesn’t want to go there. Whether that means she stays at UConn for a sixth year (she has another year of eligibility because of COVID and injuries) or she forces a trade will be the question. 

The Mets will miss the playoffs after committing $765 million to Juan Soto: Soto will enjoy a fine debut season in Queens, but the Mets can’t recapture 2024’s magic and finish third in the NL East with a shaky pitching staff – in the first of the slugger’s 15 years under contract. 

— The Detroit Lions will FINALLY make it to the Super Bowl: But then lose to Patrick Mahomes and the Kansas City Chiefs, who will become the first team in the Super Bowl era to three-peat.

Bill Belichick will go back to the NFL: A moderately successful debut season at North Carolina will put Belichick back on the radar of NFL teams, and he’ll decide that the necessary politicking of college football is just not for him.

— Aaron Rodgers retires, and then comes back to play:  He couldn’t be more like Brett Favre if he tried. After his time with the Jets didn’t pan out, Rodgers calls it quits on his career… until some team comes calling and he misses being in the spotlight.

Michael Vick and Norfolk State beat Rutgers: In his first year as head coach, Vick and the FCS Spartans pick up a shocking road win over a Big Ten opponent. The former No. 1 overall pick’s name begins getting floated for every major job opening.

LeBron James retires after being traded back to the Cavaliers: … Who he helps win their second NBA championship.

— Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce announce engagement: This sets off hysteria among the Dads, Brads and Chads (and Tony Dungy), who are incensed they will continue having to see the pop superstar for 20 seconds during a 3½ -hour game.

– Mikaela Shiffrin gets her 100th World Cup victory: An unfathomable mark that is unlikely to ever be equaled. (This isn’t a stretch; she’s at 99.) 

Bill Belichick’s North Carolina Tar Heels will play a bowl game in a baseball stadium: That’d be the Pinstripe Bowl at Yankee Stadium or the Fenway Bowl in Boston – not unlike the conclusion of almost every UNC football season. On to 161st Street…

The Los Angeles Dodgers win 117 games: One more than the record-setting 2001 Seattle Mariners and 17 as in, you know, the jersey number of that guy who will be returning to the mound in 2025. 

— Nobody cares about the Club World Cup: Set in the United States a year before the 2026 World Cup, FIFA made sure to reverse-engineer its newest tournament to include (wring the last few dollars out of) the nearly-38-year-old Lionel Messi, and features an eye-popping $100 million prize for the winning team. But the 32-club showcase goes on in front of largely disinterested American stadiums with top players complaining about more cash-grab games added to a calendar lacking an offseason.

Coach Prime gets QB controversy: Deion Sanders signs a long-term contract at Colorado, but a quarterback controversy erupts during his first season without his quarterback son Shedeur, who goes No. 1 in the NFL draft. Blue-chip QB recruit Julian Lewis came to Boulder to play right away. So did Liberty transfer Kaidon Salter, who has one year of eligibility left. What does Coach Prime do about it? He plays both of them, and the Buffaloes get a playoff berth. 

— No MLS Cup for Messi: Lionel Messi has won 46 trophies for club and country, but one major honor has eluded him after two seasons in the U.S.: The MLS Cup. And, in 2025, Messi and Inter Miami will come up short again of attaining Major League Soccer’s biggest prize.

— Chiefs do not win third straight Super Bowl: Not since Lombardi’s Packers has a team won three consecutive NFL titles, but one of those championships came before the advent of the Super Bowl. Far better teams than this year’s Chiefs – 1994 Dallas Cowboys, 1990 San Francisco 49ers, 1976 Pittsburgh Steelers, 1974 Miami Dolphins come to mind – couldn’t do it. Kansas City will be the latest to fall short of Super Bowl three-peat glory.

– South Carolina women win another basketball title: The Gamebacks go back to back, the program’s third championship in four years

Phil Jackson to the rescue: Phil Jackson comes out of retirement to solve the Lakers’ problems. LeBron James announces the triangle is his least-favorite shape. They opt for a hexagon-inspired offense, and madness ensues.

Woj does not bomb: The St. Bonaventure men’s basketball team reaches the Final Four for the first time since 1970 for a very obvious reason: Adrian Wojnarowski makes all the right moves in his first year as team’s general manager.

— After sitting out 2024 WNBA season, two-time MVP Elena Delle Donne returns in a big way: Delle Donne teams up with Caitlin Clark and Aliyah Boston in Indiana after the Fever pull off a massive sign-and-trade with the Washington Mystics.

Herbstreit perfects CFP format: Tired of the criticism about which teams should be in the College Football Playoff, the selection committee decides to let ESPN analyst Kirk Herbstreit pick the teams instead. He scraps the selection rules and fills the bracket with Ohio State, Colorado and 10 teams from the Southeastern Conference based on the strength of their schedules (not wins).  All first-round games then go to overtime. But criticism about the selection process fails to die down, prompting Herbstreit to blame fringe fans and social media for ruining college football.

— Liverpool wins English Premier League: Five years after COVID spoiled celebrations for the club’s first title in three decades, Liverpool fights off a late push to win the league in their first year under manager Arne Slot.

— Tyler Reddick takes Daytona 500: In the midst of their antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR, 23XI Racing co-owners Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin dunk on the auto racing series again when their driver Tyler Reddick kicks off the 2025 season by winning NASCAR’s most iconic race, the Daytona 500.

– Ethan Holliday joins brother as No. 1 overall pick in MLB draft: Three years after Jackson was the top pick up the road in Baltimore, the Nationals select Ethan at No. 1 in 2025. The sons of All-Star Matt Holliday join the Mannings as the only brothers to be taken first overall.

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fastDownload for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Todd McLellan, who won the Stanley Cup as a Detroit Red Wings assistant, is returning to the team to try to get it back to the playoffs.

McLellan, 57, was hired as the franchise’s 29th head coach and signed to a multi-year contract on Thursday after the team fired coach Derek Lalonde.

The sliding Red Wings have dropped to seventh place in the Atlantic Division and sit eight points out of a playoff spot with 48 games to go, heading into Friday’s resumption of the NHL season after its holiday break.

Here’s what to know about the Red Wings’ new head coach:

Todd McLellan has been with the Red Wings before

He was an assistant with the Red Wings from 2005-08, overseeing the team’s forwards and the power play. The Red Wings won the Stanley Cup title in his final season there, and he left to become head coach of the San Jose Sharks.

Todd McLellan coached Sharks, Oilers and Kings

The Red Wings will be McLellan’s fourth NHL team as head coach.

San Jose Sharks (2008-15): He’s the franchise’s all-time leader in games coached (540), wins (311), points (688) and postseason games coached (62). The Sharks won the Pacific Division in his first three seasons and were the top regular-season team in his first season. McLellan went 311-163-66 in the regular season. He went to the playoffs the first six of his seven seasons in San Jose, reaching the conference final in 2010 and 2011. He missed the playoffs in his last season there.

Edmonton Oilers (2015-19): He was Connor McDavid’s first NHL coach. McLellan went 123-119-34 in the regular season, making the playoffs once in his second season after a 33-point improvement. The Oilers went to the second round that year, but they missed the playoffs in his other full seasons, and he was fired during the 2018-19 season with a 9-10-1 record.

Los Angeles Kings (2019-24): McLellan went 164-130-44 in the regular season and reached the playoffs in his third and fourth seasons, losing in the first round both times. He was fired in February with the Kings sitting in a wild-card slot but having won only three times in their previous 17 games

Todd McLellan’s career record as a head coach

He is 598-412-134 in the regular season and 42-46 in the postseason. He made the playoffs nine times in his 16 NHL seasons.

Todd McLellan’s accomplishments

His 598 regular-season wins place him 24th in NHL history and sixth among active coaches. He has reached 50 or more win three times and 100 or more points six times.

He was a finalist for the Jack Adams Award as coach of the year in 2008-09 and 2016-17 and coached at two NHL All-Star Games (2009, 2012).

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The penultimate week of the 2024 NFL regular season continues Thursday. The Chicago Bears (4-11) will host the Seattle Seahawks (8-7) in the season’s final edition of ‘Thursday Night Football’ in 2024.

Week 17 kicked off with two AFC clashes on Christmas Day, and the football-packed holiday schedule has us lined up for another intriguing showdown on Boxing Day.

The Seahawks are coming off a heartbreaking loss at home against the Minnesota Vikings and are looking to bounce back with a win to keep pace with the Los Angeles Rams in the NFC West title race. Seattle has dropped two in a row and another loss on Thursday night would render its Week 18 matchup with the Rams (9-6) moot because they would be eliminated.

Meanwhile, Chicago has lost nine in a row. The Bears have been outscored 102-42 over their last three matchups. Bears QB Caleb Williams will look to finish the season strong and build momentum toward his second NFL season. However, it could be tough sledding as Chicago’s offensive line suffered multiple injuries on the starting front in Week 16.

This matchup promises to be entertaining with Seattle’s season on the line.

NFL STATS CENTRAL: The latest NFL scores, schedules, odds, stats and more.

USA TODAY Sports will provide live updates, highlights and more from the ‘Thursday Night Football’ matchup between the Bears and Seahawks below.

DO YOU LIKE FOOTBALL? Then you’ll enjoy getting our NFL newsletter delivered to your inbox

Bears vs. Seahawks start time 

Date: Thursday, Dec. 26, 2024 
Time: 8:15 p.m. ET 

The Bears vs. Seahawks game will kick off Week 17 of the 2024 NFL season with ‘Thursday Night Football’ at 8:15 p.m. ET. 

Bears vs. Seahawks TV channel 

Live stream: Amazon Prime Video 

‘Thursday Night Football’ will be exclusively available to stream on Amazon Prime Video. 

Watch’Thursday Night Football’with a Prime Video subscription

Who are the ‘Thursday Night Football’ announcers for Amazon Prime Video? 

Al Michaels (play-by-play) and Kirk Herbstreit (analyst) will be in the broadcast booth for Prime Video, with Kaylee Hartung (sideline) and Terry McAulay (rules analyst) providing additional coverage.  

The Prime Video pregame, halftime and postgame shows feature Charissa Thompson as host, as well as former NFL players Ryan Fitzpatrick, Tony Gonzalez, Richard Sherman and Andrew Whitworth as analysts.  

Taylor Rooks is the feature reporter for Prime Video’s ‘Thursday Night Football’ coverage. Albert Breer provides reports and analysis. 

Bears vs. Seahawks picks, predictions 

Here’s how the USA TODAY Sports staff feels the Week 17 ‘TNF’ matchup between the Bears and Seahawks will shape up: 

Lorenzo Reyes: Seahawks 24, Bears 17 
Tyler Dragon: Seahawks 28, Bears 20 
Richard Morin: Bears 22, Seahawks 21 
Jordan Mendoza: Seahawks 23, Bears 16 

Bears vs. Seahawks odds, moneyline, over/under 

The Seahawks are favorites to defeat the Bears, according to the BetMGM NFL odds. Not interested in this game? Check out expert picks and best bets for every NFL game this week. 

Spread: Seahawks (-4.5) 
Moneyline: Seahawks (-225); Bears (+185) 
Over/under: 41.5 

We occasionally recommend interesting products and services. If you make a purchase by clicking one of the links, we may earn an affiliate fee. USA TODAY operates independently, and this doesn’t influence our coverage.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

When most NFL teams get their scouting report on the Baltimore Ravens offense, one area of concern is quarterback Lamar Jackson’s ability to run when his number is called or when a play breaks down.

During Wednesday’s Christmas day game against the Houston Texans, he made those scouting reports and Houston defenders look silly after rushing for 87 yards in a dominant 31-2 victory. He also broke the NFL career rushing mark by a quarterback, passing Michael Vick.

During his 48-yard touchdown run in the third quarter, Jackson faked a handoff to Derrick Henry, took off around the right side and coasted into the end zone untouched for his fourth rushing score of the season.

Jackson was clocked at a maximum speed of 21.25 mph during the touchdown run, the highest of his career as a runner.

When Jackson was told of that speed after the game, he was in disbelief.

All things Ravens: Latest Baltimore Ravens news, schedule, roster, stats, injury updates and more.

‘For real?’ he replied. ‘I was jogging.’

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fast.Download for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

If the Covid era marked a boom time for digital health companies, 2024 was the reckoning.

In a year that saw the Nasdaq jump 32%, surpassing 20,000 for the first time this month, health tech providers largely suffered. Of 39 public digital health companies analyzed by CNBC, roughly two-thirds are down for the year. Others are now out of business.

There were some breakout stars, like Hims & Hers Health, which was buoyed by the success of its popular new weight loss offering and its position in the GLP-1 craze. But that was an exception.

While there were some company-specific challenges in the industry, overall it was a “year of inflection,” according to Scott Schoenhaus, an analyst at KeyBanc Capital Markets covering health-care IT companies. Business models that appeared poised to break out during the pandemic haven’t all worked as planned, and companies have had to refocus on profitability and a more muted growth environment.

“The pandemic was a huge pull forward in demand, and we’re facing those tough, challenging comps,” Schoenhaus told CNBC in an interview. “Growth clearly slowed for most of my names, and I think employers, payers, providers and even pharma are more selective and more discerning on digital health companies that they partnered with.” 

In 2021, digital health startups raised $29.1 billion, blowing past all previous funding records, according to a report from Rock Health. Almost two dozen digital health companies went public through an initial public offering or special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, that year, up from the previous record of eight in 2020. Money was pouring into themes that played into remote work and remote health as investors looked for growth with interest rates stuck near zero.

But as the worst waves of the pandemic subsided, so did the insatiable demand for new digital health tools. It’s been a rude awakening for the sector.  

“What we’re still going through is an understanding of the best ways to address digital health needs and capabilities, and the push and pull of the current business models and how successful they may be,” Michael Cherny, an analyst at Leerink Partners, told CNBC. “We’re in a settling out period post Covid.”

Progyny, which offers benefits solutions for fertility and family planning, is down more than 60% year to date. Teladoc Health, which once dominated the virtual-care space, has dropped 58% and is 96% off its 2021 high.

When Teladoc acquired Livongo in 2020, the companies had a combined enterprise value of $37 billion. Teladoc’s market cap now sits at under $1.6 billion.

GoodRx, which offers price transparency tools for medications, is down 33% year to date. 

Schoenhaus says many companies’ estimates were too high this year.

Progyny cut its full-year revenue guidance in every earnings report in 2024. In February, Progyny was predicting $1.29 billion to $1.32 billion in annual revenue. By November, the range was down to $1.14 billion to $1.15 billion.

GoodRx also repeatedly slashed its full-year guidance for 2024. What was $800 million to $810 million in May shrank to $794 million by the November.

In Teladoc’s first-quarter report, the company said it expected full-year revenue of $2.64 billion to $2.74 billion. The company withdrew its outlook in its second quarter, and reported consecutive year-over year declines.

“This has been a year of coming to terms with the growth outlook for many of my companies, and so I think we can finally look at 2025 as maybe a better year in terms of the setups,” Schoenhaus said.  

While overzealous forecasting tells part of the digital health story this year, there were some notable stumbles at particular companies. 

Dexcom, which makes devices for diabetes and glucose management, is down more than 35% year to date. The stock tumbled more than 40% in July — its steepest decline ever — after the company reported disappointing second-quarter results and issued weak full-year guidance. 

CEO Kevin Sayer attributed the challenges to a restructuring of the sales team, fewer new customers than expected and lower revenue per user. Following the report, JPMorgan Chase analysts marveled at “the magnitude of the downside” and the fact that it “appears to mostly be self-inflicted.” 

Genetic testing company 23andMe had a particularly rough year. The company went public via a SPAC in 2021, valuing the business at $3.5 billion, after its at-home DNA testing kits skyrocketed in popularity. The company is now worth less than $100 million and CEO Anne Wojcicki is trying to keep it afloat.

In September, all seven independent directors resigned from 23andMe’s board, citing disagreements with Wojcicki about the “strategic direction for the company.” Two months later, 23andMe said it planned to cut 40% of its workforce and shutter its therapeutics business as part of a restructuring plan. 

Wojcicki has repeatedly said she intends to take 23andMe private. The stock is down more than 80% year to date. 

Investors in Hims & Hers had a much better year.

Shares of the direct-to-consumer marketplace are up more than 200% year to date, pushing the company’s market cap to $6 billion, thanks to soaring demand for GLP-1s. 

Hims & Hers began prescribing compounded semaglutide through its platform in May after launching a new weight loss program late last year. Semaglutide is the active ingredient in Novo Nordisk’s blockbuster medications Ozempic and Wegovy, which can cost around $1,000 a month without insurance. Compounded semaglutide is a cheaper, custom-made alternative to the brand drugs and can be produced when the brand-name treatments are in shortage.

Hims & Hers will likely have to contend with dynamic supply and regulatory environments next year, but even before adding compounded GLP-1s to its portfolio, the company said in its February earnings call that it expects its weight loss program to bring in more than $100 million in revenue by the end of 2025. 

Doximity, a digital platform for medical professionals, also had a strong 2024, with its stock price more than doubling. The company’s platform, which for years has been likened to a LinkedIn for doctors, allows clinicians to stay current on medical news, manage paperwork, find referrals and carry out telehealth appointments with patients. 

Doximity primarily generates revenue through its hiring solutions, telehealth tools and marketing offerings for clients like pharmaceutical companies.

Leerink’s Cherny said Doximity’s success can be attributed to its lean operating model, as well as the “differentiated mousetrap” it’s created because of its reach into the physician network. 

“DOCS is a rare company in healthcare IT as it is already profitable, generates strong incremental margins, and is a steady grower,” Leerink analysts, including Cherny, wrote in a November note. The firm raised its price target on the stock to $60 from $35. 

Another standout this year was Oscar Health, the tech-enabled insurance company co-founded by Thrive Capital Management’s Joshua Kushner. Its shares are up nearly 50% year to date. The company supports roughly 1.65 million members and plans to expand to around 4 million by 2027. 

Oscar showed strong revenue growth in its third-quarter report in November. Sales climbed 68% from a year earlier to $2.4 billion.

Additionally, two digital health companies, Waystar and Tempus AI, took the leap and went public in 2024. 

The IPO market has been largely dormant since late 2021, when soaring inflation and rising interest rates pushed investors out of risk. Few technology companies have gone public since then, and no digital health companies held IPOs in 2023, according to a report from Rock Health. 

Waystar, a health-care payment software vendor, has seen its stock jump to $36.93 from its IPO price of $21.50 in June. Tempus, a precision medicine company, hasn’t fared as well. It’s stock has slipped to $34.91 from its IPO price of $37, also in June.

“Hopefully, the valuations are more supportive of opportunities for other companies that have been lingering in the background as private companies for the last several years.” Schoenhaus said. 

Several digital health companies exited the public markets entirely this year. 

Cue Health, which made Covid tests and counted Google as an early customer, and Better Therapeutics, which used digital therapeutics to treat cardiometabolic conditions, both shuttered operations and delisted from the Nasdaq. 

Revenue cycle management company R1 RCM was acquired by TowerBrook Capital Partners and Clayton, Dubilier & Rice in an $8.9 billion deal. Similarly, Altaris bought Sharecare, which runs a virtual health platform, for roughly $540 million.

Commure, a private company that offers tools for simplifying clinicians’ workflows, acquired medical AI scribing company Augmedix for about $139 million.

“There was a lot of competition that entered the marketplace during the pandemic years, and we’ve seen some of that being flushed out of the markets, which is a good thing,” Schoenhaus said.

Cherny said the sector is adjusting to a post-pandemic period, and digital health companies are figuring out their role.

“We’re still cycling through what could be almost termed digital health 1.1 business models,” he said. “It’s great to say we do things digitally, but it only matters if it has some approach toward impacting the ‘triple aim’ of health care: better care, more convenient, lower cost.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

When the LPGA and U.S. Golf Association announced a new policy that effectively bans transgender women, they said they were doing so on the advice of medical experts as well as research that shows going through male puberty would give transgender women a competitive advantage in golf.

Yet neither organization would provide details on the experts or the science, and two researchers who specialize in studies of transgender athletes said there has been no such study involving golfers. Nor, several researchers say, is there any reliable study showing that transgender women have a clear competitive advantage.

‘There’s nothing we can see in the reviewed literature, nothing reliable that would suggest there‘s an unfair advantage so far,’ said Debra Kriger, who as a research associate at E-Alliance was part of the team that reviewed available data and literature on the participation of transgender women in sport for the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport.

In fact, most studies used to claim transgender women have competitive advantages in sports are based on the performances of cisgender men, which is not an appropriate comparison. Or compare the performance of transgender women athletes with that of cisgender women who are ‘sedentary,’ or not athletes. Also not an appropriate comparison.

One of the few studies that did compare transgender women athletes with cisgender women athletes found transgender women had lower lung capacity and cardiovascular function, possibly putting them at a disadvantage.

“Transgender women, athletes in particular, are very, very different from cisgender male athletes,” said Blair Hamilton, one of the researchers on the study, which was published in April in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.

‘That’s one of the big takeaways we found from the research we did. They need to be studied as their own, unique cohort.’

The problem is there aren’t enough transgender athletes to do robust, long-term studies. And bans like those by the LPGA and USGA will only make it harder to do the research that will allow participation decisions to be made on facts and data rather than fear and demonization.

“There’s not that much data there,” D.J. Oberlin, an assistant professor and exercise physiologist at Lehman College who last year published a paper reviewing the available science on transgender participation in sports.

Said Hamilton, who is a research associate at Manchester Metropolitan University, “The more these policies shut us down, the less chance there is to actually find the correct answer to this.”

The transgender population is minuscule, just 0.6 percent of Americans 13 and older, according to a 2022 study by the Williams Institute, a UCLA Law think tank. And contrary to what some politicians and right-wing influencers would have you believe, the number of transgender athletes is even lower.

NCAA president Charlie Baker said last week there are ‘less than 10’ transgender athletes out of 510,000 collegiate athletes. There has been one openly transgender woman at the Olympics, despite their participation being allowed since 2004. There are no openly transgender women in the WNBA, NWSL, LPGA or WTA.

But transgender people, athletes in particular, are increasingly the target of the right wing, with widespread ignorance and bad faith arguments often being used to marginalize them.

Transgender women athletes are characterized by opponents as men, when research shows they are not. Even before hormone therapy, transgender women have lower lean body mass and strength, according to that Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport report, published in 2022. Those appear to be further reduced with hormone therapy, said Kriger, now assistant manager of Co-curricular, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging at the University of Toronto Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education.

Said Hamilton, ‘A lot of people who want to push bans look at transgender women (and say), `They have bigger skeletons, so they have more muscle mass.’ If you look at transgender women athletes, they’re actually weaker than cisgender athletes. They actually have less muscle mass to power.”

The effect of prior exposure to testosterone in transgender women is often presumed, too, equated with the effects of doping, according to the CCES report. But that, it said, is a “false biological equivalency.” Or the performances by cisgender men are used as predictors for transgender women.

“Many of the claims about the benefits of testosterone in athletics have gone unchecked since they are often taken for granted in biological research papers and do not include citations,” the CCES report said.

When the International Women’s Forum, a conservative group hostile to transgender women, sent a letter to Tour officials in August signed by 275 current and former players, it cited performance statistics of cisgender men to argue cisgender women would be at a disadvantage against transgender women.

Neither the LPGA nor USGA would say if that letter was used in crafting the new gender policy, announced earlier this month. The LPGA said it consulted “experts across diverse fields, including medicine, science, sports physiology, golf performance and gender policy law, alongside feedback from a broad array of stakeholders.” The USGA said it had “consulted with a range of experts in transgender medicine and sports science” and was “confident that we received the benefit of objective, scientific research from independent, unbiased experts.”

But Hamilton and Oberlin said there is no study that has compared the performance of transgender women golfers who’ve done gender affirming hormone therapy with cisgender women golfers. With the LPGA and USGA refusing to provide evidence to the contrary, the only conclusion can be that the assumptions they are making about transgender women are just that: Assumptions.

“I suspect that they did consult people,” Oberlin said. “I don’t know how thoroughly they looked across everybody or if they just went to one or two people who were probably going to agree with them.”  

Kriger said one of the things that jumped out to the research team behind the CCES report was the lack of clarity in what gives any athlete a performance advantage. Is it hormones? Is it height? Is it limb length?

There’s simply no way to make sweeping generalizations, Kriger said. Not from a factual basis, anyway.

‘It’s such a mystery as to what makes performance peak,’ she said. ‘To link that back to specific biomarkers, it seems from the review, is a bit of a doomed project. There hasn’t been something yet that’s popped up that this is the biomarker that can distinguish gender or can distinguish performance.

‘It seems,’ she added, ‘it would be likely it would be more of a mix.’

The bans on transgender athletes are an extension of what has long been a policing of women’s bodies and attempts to keep women out of sports. Women were banned from running the Boston Marathon until 1972 because they were not believed to be “physiologically capable.” Women ski jumpers were not allowed at the Olympics until 2014 for fear their uteruses would fall out. Women were forced to undergo genital checks in the 1960s, with one humiliating method dubbed ‘the nude parade’ because it required athletes to walk past doctors without underwear on. This was eventually replaced by genetic screening.

Only after scientific evidence to the contrary, and doses of common sense, were these ridiculous ideas abandoned. Who’s to say bans of transgender athletes won’t be looked at the same way in the future?

But without more studies, preferably sport-specific research, no one will be able to say for sure. Until then, Hamilton and the other authors of the BJSM study cautioned sports organizations against imposing bans and excluding transgender athletes.

“If you’re so confident about your position, why not just let us do our work?” Hamilton said. “Let transgender athletes compete right now, let us test them. If we find out there is an advantage, we’ll report that.”

Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on social media @nrarmour.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The NBA Christmas Day quintuple-header offered some star performances and interesting results, but the calendar rolls on with a full weekend slate.

On Friday, fans will get a rematch of the Eastern Conference Finals, as the Indiana Pacers, winners of six of their last seven, visit the Boston Celtics, who will try to snap out of their first losing streak of the season.

Also on Friday, an interesting East-West matchup will be on show as the Cleveland Cavaliers take on the Denver Nuggets.

Meanwhile, things won’t be easy for the Golden State Warriors, who have lost 11 of their last 14; they have games Friday against the 17-13 Clippers, Saturday against the 15-14 Suns and Monday against the 26-4 Cavaliers.

Here are some takeaways from the eighth week of the NBA regular season.

The Cavaliers have staying power; here’s how they can get even better

Cleveland (26-4) has proved it is not a fluke and that coach Kenny Atkinson’s plan to space the floor has paid off in an ultra-efficient offense. Yet, as good as the Cavs have been, posting the league’s best winning percentage (.867) over the first two months of the season, there’s one weakness that — if remedied — could make them even better.

The Cavaliers have lost the rebounding battle in each of their four losses. Cleveland has been outrebounded in those games by a margin of eight rebounds per game. In losses, Cleveland’s rebounding percentage is 45.9%; in their victories, that metric is 4.2 percentage points higher.

Victor Wembanyama, Spurs still need some more help

The Spurs’ recent stretch suggests they are far better than previous seasons, especially as Victor Wembanyama continues to develop as an elite offensive weapon, but this stretch also suggests San Antonio (15-15) is still a piece or two away.

Wembanyama was already a generational defender, with his ability to block, alter and even prevent opponents from considering certain shots. But now he’s blossoming as an inside-out scorer with range, slashing ability and a silky smooth shot. Wembanyama is averaging 35 points over his last four games, including 5.8 made 3 pointers in that span.

Now, some may protest the volume at which he’s shooting 3s, but he’s lacing them at a 44.2% clip over his last four games.

The issue is San Antonio (15-15) has won just two of those games, and Wembanyama isn’t getting a ton of help. The Spurs have had four different players to be second on the team in scoring in each of the last four games; on the surface, that suggests depth and can be a positive. Those players, however, averaged just 19.3 points per game in that span.

San Antonio has some nice, young pieces like rookie Stephon Castle, Devin Vassell and Jeremy Sochan. That alone won’t be enough to compete in the loaded West.

Celtics are on a two-game losing streak. Are there big-picture concerns?

This marks the first time all season that Boston (22-8) has lost two in a row, but it’s hard to take a pessimistic view from this stretch. In many ways, this feels like a similar issue that befell the Celtics last season — as much as someone can say that a dominant team that rolled through the playoffs had an issue.

But Boston, at times, can play complacent, almost as if they get bored of beating up on teams. Take Monday night’s loss against the Magic. The Celtics held a 15-point lead against an Orlando squad without its two best players in Paolo Banchero and Franz Wagner. Boston, which often relies too much on the 3-point shot, went just 8-of-33 (24.2%) from beyond the arc, and let their lead slip away in the third quarter.

Christmas evening against the 76ers was a different story. Philadelphia built a big lead in the second quarter, and the Celtics were forced to claw back the rest of the way. Defensive effort during an 18-2 Sixers run in the fourth quarter was not up to Boston’s typical standard.

The NBA season is long. Teams sometimes fall into ruts. Boston has shown it is fully capable of overcoming any midseason doldrums.

Pacers have (finally) found their rhythm and have done so in a very characteristic way

The Pacers (15-15) have won five in a row and six of seven, and they’ve reinvested in a philosophy from last year that launched their deep postseason run. Indiana is once again protecting the ball and passing it around with intention; over the last five games, the Pacers rank first in the NBA in assist-to-turnover ratio (2.67), assist ratio (22.5) and turnover percentage (12%).

Compare those numbers to Indiana’s totals from the entire season: 1.92 (11th), 19.8 (tied for seventh) and 14.3% (13th). All-Star point guard Tyrese Haliburton has led that charge, though backup T.J. McConnell has been key off the bench.

Indiana’s players are also getting to their spots more efficiently and moving well without the ball. Over the last five games, Pacers assists are creating an average of 10.2 more points per game against their season totals.

What’s interesting is the Pacers have also done something very uncharacteristic: They’re slowing down.

Over the last five games, they rank 16th in pace (99.8), one season after ranking second (102.16).

Logjam in the middle of the West is compelling, and the margin for error is slim

On Christmas morning, the Lakers were the No. 7 seed, the Warriors were No. 8, the Spurs No. 9, the Timberwolves 10th and Suns 11th. By the end of the night, Los Angeles had beat Golden State, Phoenix beat Denver — which remained the fifth seed — and San Antonio lost to the Knicks.

By the end of the night, different teams were sitting in seeds No. 6 through 11 than had been the night previous. It’s a microcosm of the parity in the Western Conference and how little separates the teams in the middle of the pack.

It also suggests that health, consistency and continuity will be paramount for teams in, and on the fringes, of that play-in range.

For teams like the Suns, who have battled injury issues to their Big Three and as Devin Booker (groin) missed another game, and for teams with aging stars like the Lakers with LeBron James and Anthony Davis, this is perhaps magnified.

The biggest certainty here is as the season progresses, and the standings tighten, it should make for a compelling race to get to that coveted six-seed.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Congressional Democrats are pushing for federal policies mandating that gyms and fitness centers in the U.S. be accessible for Americans with disabilities. 

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Calif., introduced a bill ‘to promote the provision of exercise machines and equipment, and exercise and fitness classes and instruction, that are accessible to individuals with disabilities’ earlier this week, the Congressional Record shows.

It appears to be a companion bill to the ‘Exercise and Fitness For All Act’ introduced in the upper chamber by Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., earlier this year.

The legislation would direct the U.S. Access Board, a federal agency regulating accessibility for people with disabilities, to create new rules for fitness facilities across the country.

It would mandate ‘that exercise or fitness instruction offered by the exercise or fitness service provider are accessible to individuals with disabilities,’ and that at least one employee trained in working with people with disabilities be on the clock during all operating hours.

If implemented, it would be a significant step forward for accessibility advocates in the U.S., and a significant change for potentially hundreds of U.S. businesses.

Duckworth told Forbes in July of this year that part of her inspiration for the bill came from her own struggles to find adequate gym equipment. Duckworth, a retired lieutenant colonel, lost both of her legs when a rocket-propelled grenade hit the helicopter she was co-piloting in Iraq in 2004.

She and DeSaulnier were both part of a prior push in the 117th Congress to introduce the bill, alongside late Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska.

‘[F]ar too many Americans are still excluded from basic access to exercise equipment and fitness classes due to outdated equipment and services, inaccessible to individuals with disabilities,’ DeSaulnier said in a statement at the time. 

‘It is unacceptable that these barriers still exist that make it more difficult for individuals with disabilities to get the exercise they need to live healthy lives.’

His re-introduction of the bill on Tuesday appears to be largely symbolic, considering there are no more legislative days in the 118th Congress’ calendar.

Fox News Digital reached out to DeSaulnier’s office for further comment.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The problem has been percolating for a while. 

It’s been subterranean. Lurking underneath the surface. Not necessarily perceptible.

Except to those who follow Congress closely.

But the issue has gurgled to the top since the House stumbled badly trying to avert a government shutdown last week.

To wit: 

Congress spasmed between a staggering, 1,500-page spending bill. Then defeated a narrow, 116-page bill – which President-elect Trump endorsed. Things got worse when the House only commandeered a scant 174 yeas for the Trump-supported bill and 38 Republicans voted nay. Circumstances grew even more dire when the House actually voted to avert a holiday government shutdown – but passed the bill with more Democrats (196) than Republicans (170). Thirty-four GOPers voted nay.

It was long likely that House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., might face a problem winning the speaker’s gavel immediately when the new Congress convenes at noon ET on Jan. 3. Congressional experts knew that Johnson could be in trouble once the contours of the reed-thin House majority came into focus weeks after the November election. This could blossom into a full-blown crisis for Johnson – and House Republicans –when the speaker’s vote commences a little after 1 p.m. ET next Friday. 

Johnson emerges bruised from last week’s government funding donnybrook. Anywhere from four to 10 Republicans could oppose Johnson in the speaker’s race. 

Here’s the math:

The House clocks in at 434 members with one vacancy. That’s thanks to former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla. He resigned his position for this Congress a few weeks ago. Even though Gaetz won re-election in November, his resignation letter – read on the floor of the House – signaled he did not plan to serve in the new Congress, which begins in January.

This is the breakdown when the Congress starts: 219 Republicans to 214 Democrats.

Trump’s pick for national security adviser, Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., remains in the House for now. So does Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y. Trump tapped her to serve as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. That’s pending Senate confirmation – perhaps in late January or early February. Once Waltz and Stefanik resign, the GOP majority dwindles to 217-214.

But the speaker’s election on Jan. 3 poses a special challenge. Here’s the bar for Johnson – or anyone else: The speaker of the House must win an outright majority of all members casting ballots for someone by name. In other words, the person with the most votes does not win. That’s what happened repeatedly to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., when he routinely outpolled House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., for speaker to begin this Congress in January 2023. But it took days for McCarthy to cross the proper threshold.

More on that in a moment. 

So let’s crunch the math for Mike Johnson. If there are 219 Republicans and four voted for someone besides him – and all Democrats cast ballots for Jeffries, the tally is 215-214. But there’s no speaker. No one attained an outright majority of all members casting ballots for someone by name. The magic number is 218 if all 434 members vote. 

By rule, this paralyzes the House. The House absolutely, unequivocally, cannot do anything until it elects a speaker. Period. 

The House can’t swear in members. Technically, they’re still representatives-elect. Only after the House chooses its speaker does he or she in turn swear in the membership. 

The House certainly can’t pass legislation. It can’t form committees. It’s frozen in a parliamentary paralysis until it elects a speaker.

Now, I hope you’re sitting down for the next part.

This also means that the House cannot certify the results of the Electoral College, making Trump the 47th president of the United States on Jan. 6.

The failure to elect a speaker compels the House to vote over and over…

And over… and… over…

Until it finally taps someone. 

McCarthy’s election incinerated 15 ballots over five days two years ago.

The House settled into a congressional cryogenic freeze for three weeks after members ousted McCarthy in October 2023. It burned through two speaker candidates off the floor – House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., and House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn. – and one candidate on the floor: Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. 

So you see the problem.

Consider for a moment that prior to last year, the House never went to a second ballot to select a speaker since Speaker Frederick Gillett, R-Mass., in 1923. 

It took 63 ballots before the House finally settled on Speaker Howell Cobb, D-Ga., in 1849.

But that’s nothing. The longest speaker’s election consumed two months before the House elected Speaker Nathaniel Banks, R-Mass., in 1856 – on the 133rd ballot.

So anything which elongates this into a collision with Jan. 6 – the statutory day to certify the election results and now one of the most ignominious days in American history – is dangerous.

To be clear: there is no dispute that Trump won the election. There is no anticipation of a repeat of a riot at the Capitol like four years ago. But a failure to certify the Electoral College on the day it’s supposed to be completed – especially after the 2021 experience – is playing with fire. Such a scenario would again reveal another, never-before-considered vulnerability in the fragile American political system.

On Jan. 6, the House and Senate are supposed to meet in a joint session of Congress to tabulate and certify the electoral votes. Any disputes over a state’s slate of electoral votes compels the House and Senate to then debate and vote separately on those results. The election is not final until the joint session concludes and the vice president – in this case Kamala Harris – in her capacity as president of the Senate, announces a victor.

Congress is not required to certify the Electoral College on the calendar day of Jan. 6. There is actually some leeway to wrap things up. In 2021, the Electoral College wasn’t certified until around 3:52 a.m. on Jan. 7. It only becomes a major problem if this drags on through noon on Jan. 20. That’s when the Constitution prescribes that the president-elect take the oath of office. 

What happens if the Electoral College isn’t sorted out by Jan. 20? Well, President Biden is done. So he’s gone. The same with Harris. Next in the presidential line of succession is the speaker of the House. Well, there’s no speaker. So who becomes president? 

Well, there is at that moment a president pro tempore of the Senate, the most senior member of the majority party. He or she is fourth in line to the presidency. At this moment, the president pro tempore is Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. But Republicans claim control of the chamber in early January. And unlike the House, if it’s stymied over a speaker, the Senate is functioning. That means 91-year-old Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, becomes Senate president pro tempore. Grassley has served in the Senate since 1981. 

If the House is still frittering away time, trying to elect a speaker on Jan. 20, Grassley likely becomes ‘acting president.’

I write ‘likely’ because this gets into some serious, extra-constitutional turf. These are unprecedented scenarios. Strange lands never visited in the American political experience. 

And it all hinges on Mike Johnson – or frankly, someone else – wrapping up the speaker’s vote with dispatch on Jan. 3. Any interregnum like the past two speaker elections begins to establish challenging historical precedents. 

But frankly, it’s unclear if the House can avoid such contretemps. 

It’s about the math. And once again, balancing that parliamentary equation is tenuous at best.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS