NEW YORK (GenomeWeb) Fulgent Genetics reported on Monday that its second quarter revenues rose 17 percent as it integrated its newly reorganized sales force.
For the three months ended June 30, Fulgent's revenues climbed to $4.6 million from $4.0 million the year before.
Registering provides access to this and other free content.
Already have an account?.
Read the rest here:
Fulgent Genetics Posts 17 Percent Increase in Q2 Revenues ... - GenomeWeb
Veritas Genetics,a leader in whole-genome sequencing, has acquired computing and bio-informatics firm Curoverse for an undisclosed amount. Curoverse provides infrastructure for life sciences companies to manage large datasets, including an open source platform called Arvados.
The acquisition isn't totally unexpected, since the two companies have a strong existing relationship. Not only were both companies cofounded by Harvard professor Dr. George Church, but Veritas and Curoverse have worked together on Harvard's Personal Genome Project.
"There are very few companies in the world that have the expertise and experience of more than a decade in aggregating genomic data and enabling machine learning," Church said in a statement. "I am pleased to see these two teams work even closer together. They not only share a common technological goal but also a commitment to making this invaluable information actionable and accessible."
Veritas offers whole genome sequencing for $999 and delivers results to customers' smartphones. The goal of the acquisition is to use Curoverse's big data expertise to enable Veritas to more easily use artificial intelligence and machine learning to extract insight from that genomic data.
"At Veritas, we are building a platform to sequence, and more importantly, interpret hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions, of human genomes per year," Veritas CEO Mirza Cifric said in a statement."This will only be possible by deploying AI and machine learning at scale, which requires data that is produced, stored and managed in a standardized way. Curoverse excels at this capability. Working closely together will not only benefit Veritas, but the industry as a whole."
Through initiatives like Arvados and the Common Workflow Language project, Curoverse has been involved in efforts to standardize the way genomic data is produced and aggregated. Veritas intends to continue supporting the goal of open standards for genomic data.
See more here:
Veritas Genetics acquires Curoverse to enable AI push ... - MobiHealthNews
As a college student at the University of Mount Union in Alliance, Ohio, Megan McMinn studied biology, hoping to one day become a physician's assistant.
But a desire to interact even more with patients led her down a different path in genetic counseling.
"What genetic counseling gave me was a good split between patient care and the hard science research end of things," McMinn said.
At Geisinger Health System in Danville, Pa., McMinn sees about six patients a day, working in oncology. Soon, she'll move onto a cardiology clinic, helping to identify genetic risks for individuals and potentially their families. The system currently has 25 genetic counselors on staff, but anticipates needing hundreds more as genetic testing becomes cheaper and more accessible.
The trend extends far beyond Geisinger, as the field has grown dramatically in the past decade, touching all aspects of health-care as medicine becomes more personalized.
"Genetics permeates everythingthere won't be enough genetic counselors to see every patient who gets genetic information," said Mary Freivogel, president of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC).
As a result, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the occupation will grow by 29 percent through 2024, faster than the average for all occupations
"I think [a genetic counselor] will become a key member of the team, discussing with patients and families what to do next, how to figure out how the genome is going to interact with your lifestyle and make decisions about what you want to do medically," said Dr. David Feinberg, president and CEO of Geisinger Health System.
Genetic counselors typically receive a bachelor's degree in biology, social science or a related field, and then go on to receive specialized training. Master's degrees in genetic counseling are offered by programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling, offered at some 30 schools in the U.S. and Canada, according to the NSGC.
Those who want to be certified as genetic counselors must obtain a master's degree from an accredited program, but do not need to be doctors.
The NSGC is also working to recruit new talent by doing outreach in middle and high schools to let younger students know the field is an option in the future. Pay is competitive as wellon average, counselors make around $80,000 a year, but that can increase up to $250,000 annually depending on specialty, location and expertise, Freivogel said.
Health insurance often pays for genetic counseling, and for genetic testing when recommended by a counselor or doctor. However, it's important to check with insurers before scheduling any tests as coverage levels vary. Cost also varies greatly, for example, as multi-gene cancer panels can range from $300 to $4,000 depending on the type of test, the lab used and whether the patient goes through his or her insurance or pays out of pocket.
And while at-home tests like 23andMe are typically less expensive, those taking them still need to see a genetic counselor to explain their results.
Part of the reason more counselors will be needed in the future at Geisinger is because the health system is home to the MyCode Community Health Initiative, one of the largest biobanks of human DNA samples of its kind, according to Amy Sturm, director of Cardiovascular Genomic Counseling at Geisinger. The project has consent from more than 150,000 patients to participate in having their entire DNA code sequenced and synced with their electronic medical records, to look for new causes of disease and different ways to treat conditions.
"We are figuring out and researching the best way to deliver this information back to our patients and also back to families with the ultimate goal of preventing disease and improving the healthcare system," Sturm said.
Keeping up with the latest in genomics, where new developments happen almost daily, can be a challenge. Yet counselors like McMinn say the ability to impact more than just the patient by studying the genome makes the job well worth it.
"We are able to bring to the forefront the fact that we're not just taking care of the patient, but we're taking care of the entire family," McMinn said.
More here:
Genetic counseling field to rapidly expand - CNBC
In another leak from the Trump Administration, The New York Times obtained a report on climate change last night (August 7).
Titled the Climate Science Special Report, it is based on the work of scientists from 13 federal agencies, and it concludes that it is extremely likely that more than half of the increase in global temperatures over the past 40 years is because of human activity. Though this has been the assertion of many of the worlds expertsand laypeopleon global warming, it is a belief that starkly contradicts those of a number of Trumps cabinet members, who claim it is uncertain how much human behavior is to blame.
The draft is now under review by the White House, which received it several weeks ago. According to New York magazine, 13 government agencies must sign off on the draft, which has already been approved by the National Academy of Sciences, by Sunday.
The Washington Post reports that scientists from these agencies fear suppression from the White House. One of the agencies that must approve it is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is headed by Scott Pruitt, who has said that he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary factor in global warming. The report insists otherwise.
In addition to Pruitt and other cabinet members disbelief about human influence on global warming, The Guardian reported yesterday that aseries of emails shows staff at the Department of Agricultures Natural Resources Conservation Service is censoring the use of the term climate change. Instead staff has been advised to use the term weather extremes.
The current situation will provide an acid test of whether the Trump Administration is open to hearing the scientific truth about climate change or is so much in the thrall of fossil fuel interests that they are fixated on hiding the reality from the public, Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton University, told the Times.
The draft report, says The Washington Post, estimates that human impact was responsible for an increase in global temperatures of 1.1 to 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit from 1951 to 2010.
In addition, scientists studied all areas of the United States. Per the Post:
It also dismisses talk of a so-called hiatus in global warming, noting that the most recent years reinforce longer-term trends. Instead, the report says, the United States faces temperature increases of 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit over the next few decades even under significantly reduced future emissions. And the record-setting temperatures of recent years will become relatively common in the near future.
Aside from a rise in temperatures across the nation, the report also posits thatair and ground temperatures in Alaska and the Arctic are rising at twice the rate of the global average. There are already coastal Native communities in Alaska that are wrestling with the realitieseconomic and culturalof relocating inland to avoid rising sea levels.
As Colorlines has previously reported, coastal communities of color bear a disproportunite brunt of climate change in the U.S. Such communities tend to live on lower-lying land more susceptible to flooding, and when it floods, they often lack the proper funds to deal with it and rebuild.
The entire report can be read here on the Times site.
Read the original:
New Federal Report on Climate Change Refutes Beliefs of Trump Cabinet - ColorLines magazine
The American Society of Safety Engineers conference in Denver sponsored a debate of sorts between the proponents of behavior-based safety (BBS) and what has come to be called human and organizational performance (HOP). These were touted as two different philosophies of workplace safety aimed at reducing workplace injuries and fatalities. The latter of these two was presented as a shift in thinking.
There are several problems with both ways of thinking that should be obvious to those in charge of safety at the site or organizational level.
The first problem is that neither of these represent an overall strategy for safety. Each approach focuses on one aspect of what is needed to create a safe workplace and ignores almost everything else. Neither really is a philosophy, but rather a program or process.
A true strategy is a value proposition that defines how to win. In the case of safety, it would define how to win the war against accidental injuries and fatalities. Both these approaches fail to define what true safety excellence looks like or what it takes to achieve it. Rather, both prescribe a series of steps to fail less.
For decades, safety metrics largely have been lagging indicators or failure metrics. Such measurements prompt organizations to work reactively to drive the metrics down or fail less. Success is defined as the lack of failure rather than a strategic achievement.
The second problem lies in the fact that every site (even within the same organization) has a unique culture. While both of these approaches have been successful at reducing accidents, the successes are less a function of methodology and more a function of fit. BBS stresses working on specific behaviors and HOP stresses working on organizational support factors. The approach that will work best for the specific site is the one that best addresses the site-specific safety challenges. The factor that can change this reality is the extent to which the process can be customized for the site.
BBS became so popular at one time that many practices with little to do with mainstream behavioral thinking were labeled as BBS. Academic experts and consultants proposed very specific methods for doing BBS. Because of this, many people have a very limited or specific view of what BBS really is. Based on the most popular approaches, BBS has several main components:
Selecting specific safety-related worker behaviors. Observing workers to see if they are doing these behaviors. Using various methods to encourage (positively reinforce) or discourage the behaviors. Using the observation data as a leading indicator to enhance safety. Some attempted to shape the safety culture through worker interaction, caring and ownership of the process.
Many of these approaches to change worker behaviors failed to realize and address the organizational influences on the behaviors and simply attempted to force a change at the individual worker level. This omission was one factor that led to the formation of HOP.
Human and organizational performance (HOP) proposes that workplace factors of various sorts impact worker behavior and the organization should align these factors to prompt the kind of safety performance it wants.
The spokesman for human and organizational excellence in this debate explained the difference, stating BBS sees the worker as the problem to be solved while HOP views the employee as the problem solver. Neither of these recognize the worker as the customer of safety efforts. The workers definitely are not the safety problem, but neither are they the problem solvers. If workers could solve their own safety problems, they already would have done so.
While HOP requests feedback from workers on what they need to be safe, it ignores the truism that people dont know what they dont know. It is the responsibility of the safety efforts to add value to the worker: increased skills, better risk awareness, strategies for handling risks, personal protective equipment, etc. Even if the worker doesnt know they need these things, the safety department should.
Safety constantly should try to predict and exceed the needs of the worker, not just meet the known demands. Steve Jobs said no one knew they needed a smart phone until he invented one. Henry Ford said if he had given people what they thought they wanted, it would have been a faster horse. It is not enough to just ask workers and rely on their perceived wants and needs.
In all fairness, the statement that BBS views the worker as the problem is inaccurate as well. Most BBS programs focus on behaviors and realize that behavior is influenced by much more than the individual. In this regard, the two philosophies tend to agree. The organization should manage influences on human behavior, not just ask workers to change.
In this sense, these two approaches are part of a greater whole. BBS produces a measurement of targeted behaviors and an excellent opportunity to better understand what influences behavior at the very touchpoint where it is happening. If BBS observers would quit confronting workers to change behavior and start asking why when desired behaviors are not occurring, the organization could better target the specific influences impacting worker behavior.
Without such information, human and organizational performance approaches are simply seeking generic actions to prompt performance. Without the why approach, BBS naively is thinking it can change behaviors without changing the influences on behavior that could be modified in a HOP program. If these two programs quit debating and start cooperating, the result would be a much more holistic approach.
Even so, addressing worker behavior and its organizational influences only impacts one element of safety excellence. The greatest potential value of either of these programs (or a combination of them) would be if they fit into an overarching safety strategy that defined success and the specific role these programs would contribute to that success.
Terry Mathis, founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, has served as a consultant and advisor for top organizations. A respected strategist and thought leader in the industry, Mathis has authored four books and numerous articles and blogs and is known for his dynamic and engaging presentations. EHS Today has named him one of the 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS four consecutive times. Mathis can be reached at [emailprotected] or 800-395-1347.
The rest is here:
Safety and Performance Excellence: Two-Dimensional Safety - EHS Today
MONDAY, Aug. 7 2017 (HealthDay News) -- A new study suggests -- but doesn't prove -- that certain players of action video games may lose gray matter in a part of the brain that's linked to mental illness.
On the other hand, the Canadian study suggests, other players may actually benefit from the games.
And a psychologist not involved with the study said there's no evidence that video games are harmful to the brain.
The results indicate that the reported benefits of playing shooting-style video games -- such as improved attention and short-term memory -- "might come at a cost" in terms of lost brain matter in some players, said the study's lead author, Gregory West. He is an assistant professor with the department of psychology at the University of Montreal.
The difference may be the style of playing, the researchers noted.
The new study aimed to better understand the brain effects of so-called first-person and third-person shooting games -- such as Call of Duty, Battlefield, Killzone, or Medal of Honor -- compared to "3-D platform" games in the Super Mario series.
The researchers used a virtual-reality test, MRIs and 90 hours of game-playing involving 100 people who were either expert or nonexpert players. They also used MRIs to assess the impact on the hippocampus, the part of the brain that helps spatial and episodic memory.
The results showed evidence that gray matter in the hippocampus grew in those players who used so-called spatial strategies to find their way in the action video game. But the gray matter shrunk in those who navigated the same games by learned response.
Spatial players create maps in their heads to understand the geography of the world within the game, the researchers explained. And response players use an approach akin to learning a route that you travel every day -- make a right turn here, then a left, then a right -- so that you can drive on mental auto-pilot without thinking.
Those who played the Super Mario games, meanwhile, showed signs of growth in either the hippocampus or another part of the brain called the entorhinal cortex.
The study authors emphasized that they aren't saying that anyone who plays video games will develop a mental illness.
"But we know that those with less gray matter in the hippocampus are more at risk to get conditions like schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and Alzheimer's disease," said study co-author Veronique Bohbot. She is an associate professor with the department of psychiatry at McGill University in Montreal.
A video game expert called brain studies of game players problematic.
"Given that there are so many areas in the brain, it stands to reason that, by chance alone, some of these areas may randomly differ between any two groups of people," said Chris Ferguson, a professor of psychology with Stetson University in DeLand, Fla.
"Researchers can sometimes make a big deal out of these random differences and ascribe them to something like video games," he said.
Ferguson noted that overall brain research into the effects of the games hasn't revealed problems.
"Despite some wild headlines and press releases from time to time, the research suggests that video game playing is entirely safe for the brain," Ferguson said.
"The aggregate of studies have not suggested that playing video games, even 'violent' ones, cause either short- or long-term brain changes that are problematic or could be called 'brain damage,' " he added.
"Most studies also don't connect the brain differences to actual behavior. So brain studies often function like Rorschach cards, telling you more about what the researchers want to believe than anything actually happening with human behavior," Ferguson suggested.
What should video game players do? Study lead author West suggests that adults play shooter games for only two to three hours a week.
Ferguson noted that research is hinting that video games may reduce stress and improve problem-solving abilities.
"Playing video games should be balanced with other activities: offline socialization, exercise, work and school, family and good sleep," he said. "As long as games are part of a balanced lifestyle, there's no evidence that they cause harmful brain changes."
The study was published in the Aug. 7 issue of Molecular Psychiatry.
Excerpt from:
Can Video Game Playing Cost You Gray Matter? - Bloomington Pantagraph
Now PlayingGrey's Anatomy: Will DeLuca and Jo Get Together in Season 14?
With Jo's (Camilla Luddington) estranged husband Paul (Matthew Morrison) back in the picture when Grey's Anatomyreturns for Season 14, will her love triangle with DeLuca (Giacomo Gianniotti) and Alex (Justin Chambers) become a... quadrangle?
Not anytime soon, Luddington assures.
"I have yet to read a script that has my ex-husband back in it," Luddington told TV Guide at the Television Critics Association summer press tour in Los Angeles this week. "It's definitely a storyline that I hope we explore, because it's so important. But right now, it's [DeLuca] and Alex."
Of course, Jo has no idea that Alex went to confront her ex at the end of Season 13 -- and DeLuca has no idea either.
Grey's Anatomy Adds a Controversial New Doctor for Season 14
"When Jo finds out that Alex did that, I don't know what her reaction's going to be," Luddington admits. "I feel like it could go either way. They're in a really interesting time in their relationship, and it's very tricky. ... Do I think that it could push them even further away from each other? It's definitely possible."
But will it push Jo further away from Alex and then into the arms of DeLuca? We'll have to wait and see, but this is Grey's, so one thing is certain: there will be complications. For now, Jo will be leaning on DeLuca in a friendship capacity in Stephanie's (Jerrika Hinton) absence. And, after confessing his feelings to Jo didn't go over so well at the end of last season, DeLuca may be looking to move on.
"It might be a little bit more awkward, now that there's some things that have been shared between us that are a little bit more intimate," Gianniotti tells TV Guide. "We're bringing on some new people, and so there might be something there. ... If [a new romance] was to happen, I feel like Jo's the one that got away [for DeLuca]."
Adds Luddington: "This season's going to be very sexy. ... I can imagine [Jo] maybe feeling a little bit jealous if DeLuca started dating someone else. But I think she's at a time in her life right now where she has to deal with her own emotional journey and what she's going through in her past ... before she really jumps straight into a relationship with someone else. There's some stuff that she has to work through."
Grey's Anatomy kicks off Season 14 with a two-hour premiere Thursday, Sept. 28 at 8/7c on ABC.
The rest is here:
Grey's Anatomy Stars Tease "Sexy" Season 14 - TV Guide
Human, empathetic, rational, emotional, brave and agile just a snapshot of the essential attributes a modern marketing leader must possess.
From being data literate and adept at driving sales, to having the ability to tell a rich brand story, marketers can feel under real pressure to excel at every aspect of the role in order to succeed. This pressure, coupled with the shrinking length of CMO tenure, is putting marketing leaders under the microscope like never before.
To examine the key skills and attributes required by a modern marketing leader in 2017 Marketing Week has carried out an in-depthqualitative and quantitive study, mapping out the Anatomy of a Leader.
The first part of the study looked at the core responsibilities of a marketing leader, with our survey of more than 600 marketers finding thatsales and commercial awareness (74%) is considered the most important responsibility for marketing leaders.
Now, switching the focus to the essential attributes of a modern leader, it is strategic thinking that most marketers (86%) believe is imperative.
Relationship building came in a distant second (61%), followed by people management (60%), vision (59%) and problem solving (57%).
Conversely, visual presentation emerged as the least important skill for a marketing leader (14%), followed by practicality (15%), general knowledge (16%), specialist knowledge (16%) and written communication (20%).
READ MORE:Take our quiz to find out if you have the Anatomy of a Leader
Recognition of the importance of strategy is welcomed by Marketing Week columnist Mark Ritson: In recent years, marketing has become more and more tactical and we have lost the art of developing clear strategic direction first. We like to debate the knobs and dials of communication, but do not have a clear strategy for our brands first.
Adaptability (87%) was identified as the attribute growing most in importance for marketing leaders, followed by strategic thinking (83%), vision (81%) and technical proficiency (77%).
The fact that strategic thinking, commercial awareness and vision are now seen as being more important is unsurprising since more marketing leaders are moving into roles with a broader set of commercial and customer accountabilities, says Direct Line Groups marketing director, Mark Evans.
What is perhaps surprising is that more marketing leaders believe that technical proficiency has simultaneously become more important. I suspect that this relates to being literate and staying fresh with regards to all things digital. However, there is a risk of being a jack of all trades and a master of none.
Evans recognises that not all digital skills are a must-have for marketing leaders and while it is helpful for CMOs to understand developments in digital, it is better to remain channel agnostic.
CMOs may feel pressure to personally build digital skills, but I dont think its something to lose sleep over if you have invested in your team, he adds.
Bacardi head of creative excellence, Zara Mirza, agrees it is less about being a super CMO who can do it all and more about building strong teams. At Bacardi, we have more than one CMO. We have me, we have a head of data, head of PR. Together we figure it out and we all report into the CEO.
Thats a smart move as theres not going to be one person as a super CMO. Having lots of perspectives and figuring it out together will give you a better chance of success.
READ MORE:Russell Parsons The modern marketing leaders might not be who you think
Looking ahead, problem solving (77%), the ability to listen (74%), resilience (74%), people management (67%) and risk taking (67%) are key attributes that marketers say are becoming the DNA of a marketing leader.
By contrast the research finds that experience (11%), specialist knowledge (10%), tactical execution (9%) and assertiveness (7%) are the attributes marketers are most likely to identify as becoming less important to the make up of the modern leader.
LinkedIn CMO ShannonStubo believes asking the right questions and using the answers to solve problems is the hallmark of a successful leader. Reflecting on her own background in PR, Stubo explains that despite not having the typical marketing experience of most CMOs, she understands how to set a vision, hire great people and build excellent teams.
Marketing leaders need to be able to identify the right talent, but also be relationship-focused with key stakeholders. They need to be able to dedicate time to mentoring and coaching to help teams develop, as well as navigate and adapt to increasingly fast-moving trends, she adds.
READ MORE: LinkedIns CMO on being a marketing boss with PR DNA
Reflecting on the skills he feels are missing from the top survey findings, Britvic CMO Matt Barwell highlights the ability to lead creatively and encourage an environment of creative thinking, which he argues are attributes far more likely to deliver true breakthroughs.
Humanity and empathy are the stand-out traits of a brilliant marketing leader in the opinion of Tommy Hilfiger CMO Avery Baker, who argues that leading without an ego is the only way to get the best out of people.
However, these softer skillsfail to impress Ritson. All this wank about humanity and bravery is the outcome of sitting around on yachts in Cannes feeling each others pain. Its time for marketers to wake up and smell the coffee. Our role is as a fundamental part of organisational success, not some personality-driven, self help group for sensitive people.
Peugeot marketing director Mark Pickles disagrees, arguing that marketers ultimately have to be brave and adaptable in order to succeed.
It is only by understanding the core desires, motivations and demands of consumers, and being brave enough to consider how to quickly adapt the enterprise to deliver these that the modern marketer can survive and prosper.
However, in the opinion of IBM CMO Lisa Gilbert, the perfect marketing leader is T-shaped. She defines this as a mixture of general leadership skills, like the ability to set a vision or the tenacity to bring an idea over the finish line, combined with expertise such as the ability create a compelling narrative or get to the root of a data problem.
This mix of skills is underpinned by empathy and the ability to manage your energy, explains Gilbert.
Being a leader in this fast-paced industry takes stamina. Fortifying yourself with people who lift you up, coupled with a few good nights sleep are critical to winning the marathon of leadership versus the sprint.
At its core Marketing Weeksresearch reaffirms how essential it is for marketers of any level to possess strong commercial awareness and strategic thinking, talents that are superseding functional skills such as copywriting and design.
To be a successful marketing leader the key is to recognise that you do not need to be good at everything and that fundamentally it is far more valuable to ask the right questions, listen to the answers and empower your teams to execute your vision with confidence and creativity.
Marketing Week will further explore the necessaryqualitiesfor leadership on the Realising YourPotential stage at the Festival of Marketing in October. For tickets, visit festivalofmarketing.com
Original post:
Anatomy of a Leader: The practical skills you need to get to the top - Marketing Week
Share Pin Share Tumble
Combined comments & shares on social media
Updated Aug. 8, 2017, 8 a.m. PT: Grey's Anatomy is making casting changes so quickly, we can hardly keep up.
In the latest announcement, Refinery29 reports that series regular Marika Dominczyk, who plays Dr. Eliza Minnick, won't be returning for Season 14.
Fans who watched the end of the last season probably won't be surprised. Eliza Minnick joined at the start of Season 13, and she came into Grey Sloan Memorial like a wrecking ball, pissing off pretty much every doctor (except Arizona, who she instead dated), and getting unceremoniously fired by Bailey in the season finale. At least Shonda Rhimes didn't kill her, so the door is open for her to reappear later. Let's all just hold out hope for that.
Original story:
Grey's Anatomy has some pretty big casting news for Season 14.
More: Jesse Williams' Insta Is Making Us So Hungry for Grey's Anatomy
Glee star Matthew Morrison has revealed that he'll be reprising his role from the end of Season 13 as Dr. Paul Stadler by returning as a series regular in the upcoming season. But Morrison is staying tight-lipped about the details, saying only that he has a "big role coming up." What we do know is that there will be drama between Morrison's character and Justin Chambers' character, Alex Karev. They crossed paths briefly at the end of the 13th season, where it was revealed that Dr. Stadler is Jo's abusive estranged husband, and if we know anything about Alex Karev, it's that he fiercely defends the people he loves.
The show's upcoming season will also welcome Timeless star Abigail Spencer as Owen's sister, Megan Hunt. Megan was presumed to be dead, but the end of the Season 13 finale saw Owen anxiously awaiting her arrival to Seattle. She was previously played by Bridget Regan, who was unable to take the recurring role due to her commitment to TNT's Last Ship. She did congratulate Spencer on landing the role, though.
More: Grey's Anatomy's Finale Had a Sad Goodbye but These Deaths Were Way Worse
"Thanks for all the love guys! @abigailspencer is an incredible actor, tip top lady and will be a BRILLIANT Megan on #GreysAnatomy," she wrote.
More: Grey's Anatomy Season 14 Will Feature a Blast From the Past
Season 14 of Grey's Anatomy premieres with a two-hour episode on Thursday, Sept. 28.
The rest is here:
Grey's Anatomy Is Making So Many Cast Changes, We Can Barely ... - SheKnows.com
When youre a rebuilding team, its hard to find wins anywhere, but this current stretch is a tall order for anybody.
The White Sox ended the first half with three games against the Rockies, then opened the second half with the Mariners, Dodgers, Royals, Cubs, Indians, Blue Jays and Red Sox. Theyll start a series with the Astros today, followed by more Royals and Dodgers before a softer week arrives.
Thats nine teams with winning records at the time the White Sox played them, and the Mariners are over .500 and adding now (they acquired Yonder Alonso). The math says the White Sox would find it difficult to win, and the results bear that out, with a whopping 20 losses over their last 23 games.
As a result, the White Sox are now within one game of the No. 1 pick in the 2018 draft.
Heres how the standings looked at the opening of the second half.
The White Sox made up eight games on the Phillies over a stretch of 22 games, during a stretch where the Phillies played only .500 baseball. This is like The Phold in reverse.
Its been a team effort, because the White Sox sport both ...
Baseballs worst offense: In the second half, the White Sox rank dead last in all of baseball in runs (68), OBP (.284) and OPS (.658) ... and that includes teams that dont have the designated hitter. The position players as a group are 0.1 wins below replacement. The Brewers are the only ones worse, and by one-tenth of a point.
... and ...
The leagues worst pitching: The White Sox have the ALs worst second-half ERA at 5.34, with the Rockies (5.68) and Red (5.84) trailing. It could be worse, because the Sox have yielded a whopping 45 homers over 193 23 innings, along with the highest OBP (.371) and slugging percentage (.520). The Rockies are the only team within 50 points of OPS, and they play at Coors Field. Most of this is on the rotation, which has a 6.28 ERA (second-worst) and a 1.69 WHIP (easily the worst) since the All-Star break. As a whole, the White Sox pitching staff has been worth -1.5 WAR, with every other team on the positive side.
Its not all bad. Carlos Rodon has finally tied together two overpowering starts, Yoan Moncada went 5-for-14 with three walks during the Boston series, and Reynaldo Lopez is starting on Friday, although the White Sox havent yet made that official. There are aspects of this team worth watching on a regular basis.
They just get overshadowed by the overwhelming talent deficit the Sox face day in and day out. Most of it shows up on the scoreboard, but theyre even battling parts that get buried in the box scores (the White Sox running into outs while being unable to slow down the running game, for instance).
The arrival of baseballs sluggingest offense figures to only exacerbate the problem, but the White Sox arent too good for anybody anymore. If they can only count on wins against teams with worse records, they wont play the Philles until 2019.
Excerpt from:
The anatomy of the White Sox' 3-19 second half - South Side Sox