Clash of the conference Titans; SJO outlasts Unity

TOLONO - There weren't a lot of open spaces in the stands to plop down and watch the ensuing epic basketball game between visiting St. Joseph-Ogden and the host Unity at the Rocket Center on Friday. While it was a mild winter's evening outside, it was the heat and humidity of a Florida spring in the near-capacity-filled gym. The air was brewing with palatable excitement as the two teams with a combined record of 45-8, each enjoying a four-game win streak heading toward tipoff, warmed up.

Unity's Dane Eisenmenger tries to keep St. Joseph-Ogden's Luke Landrus from getting deep penetation into the paint during first quarter action of their Illini Prairie Conference game on Friday. See more photos below.

Photo: PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks

---

Unity (23-3) snagged the opening tip and it wasn't long before fans were forced to the edge of their seats by the 5's, Unity's Henry Thomas and SJO's Logan Smith. The two seniors, who later hugged after St. Joseph-Ogden (23-6) prevailed in the 73-72 overtime win, put on an impressive show of basketball skill, tenacity, and mental toughness.

"This was a fun basketball game," said Unity head coach Matt Franks. "This is what high school basketball is all about. I thought it was a great atmosphere."

Smith, who finished the contest with a game-high 29 points had five assists and three rebounds, drew first blood on a layup to momentarily put St. Joseph-Ogden in the lead on the scoreboard.

St. Joseph-Ogden head coach Kiel Duval said players like Smith, with his mindset, are tough to beat.

"It is tough to knock him down. He is an absolute winner," he said. "He has a 'refuse to lose' mentality. When you've got that, you are tough to beat."

On the next two possessions, Thomas scored in the paint giving, and Dalton O'Neill added two more points on a reverse layup to give the Rockets a 6-2 lead.

"Henry has worked really, really hard to get his game to where he can have a night like this," Frank said. Thomas finished the contest with a team-high 27 points and was four-for-eight from the charity stripe. Two Fridays earlier, the senior scored his 1,000th career point against Prairie Central at the Rocket Center. "I think it was a perfect combination of teammates moving the ball well so Henry can do what he does."

The Spartans would even the score on two free throws from Luke Landus and a jumper from junior Coy Taylor, tying the game at six-all.

After buckets from Unity's Tyler Henry and Eric Miebach, Andrew Thomas drains a trey, putting the Rockets up 13-6 with 1:20 left in the quarter. Flustered, the Spartans called a timeout.

The Rockets continued to lead on the scoreboard until Smith knotted the game at 19-all. After converting a free throw, SJO takes a 20-19 lead.

Unity shotmaking went cold after Coleton Langendorf hit his free throw to tie the game again at 20-all. Taking advantage of the lull, the Spartans make an 11-point run, going up 31-20.

In control the rest of the first half through the first four minutes of the fourth quarter, SJO held a comfortable lead on their hosts until the last four minutes and 12 seconds of regulation time when Henry Thomas racked up eight points consecutive points, trimming his team's deficit from seven to two, 64-66.

"We got into foul trouble and had some bad matchups," Duval explained. "Their best player got looks at the basket. Once we got into foul trouble, we had trouble recovering from that. We kind of went away from doing some of the stuff we did to get good looks."

With 10.7 seconds left in the game, SJO's Tanner Jacob sinks the first of two free throws and misses the insurance basket. Unity gets the rebound and the ball down to Dane Eisenminger, who pumped a shot outside the arc in front of his team's bench. The trey falls with three seconds left in regulation time, sending the game into overtime at 67-all and the Rocket Center into an unabashed frenzy.

Smith was the only player from either team to hit a field goal in overtime, helping St. Joseph-Ogden tallied six points against Unity's five to end one of the most exciting basketball games in the St. Joe-Unity rivalry.

"Both teams played really hard," Franks said. "A game like this could have gone all night. It was great basketball."

A free throw away from a second overtime, Franks said his game plan would have been to stay poised and composed if they had to go another session.

"(We would) stay in the moment. It's all about the next possession, and we'd have to just focus on that," he said. "St. Joe is a great team, and it takes a great effort to beat them."

Duval was expecting a dogfight and had no illusions, counting unhatched chickens. Earlier in the season, SJO suffered two losses in the last-second heartbreakers. The first in a non-conference game at Beecher 55-53, and the second on a buzzer-beater in the Small School Division State Farm Holiday Classic championship game to El Paso-Gridley.

"There were two good teams battling back and forth. We knew they were going to throw another punch," he said. "They are at home. They always play better at home."

Also contributing to SJO's scoring effort was Luke Landrus, who finished with 13 points, and Coy Taylor, 3-for-3 at the line, with 12 points. Tanner Siems had eight points, and Tanner Jacob drained a pair of treys and a free throw to finish with seven points.

Andrew Thomas, Henry's twin, finished with 13 points, and Dalton O'Neill, who went five-for-six on free throws, contributed 12 points. Eric Meibach (9), Dane Eisenmenger (5), Jay Saunders (3), and Tyler Henry (2) contributed in the Rockets' effort. Coleton Langendorf hit a solo free throw for one point.

"It was like a sectional championship game," Duval said, talking about the atmosphere. "That was huge. I am proud that our guys found a way to win."

---

Game Gallery

---

Editorial | Going for broke

Khalil Bendib / OtherWords.org

---

Commentary |This Black History Month, fight for the freedom to learn

by Svante Myrick

---

---

A little over a year ago, the College Board unveiled its long-awaited draft AP African American Studies curriculum. What happened next was sad — and all too predictable.

Florida officials, led by Gov. Ron DeSantis, howled. They claimed the course “lacks educational value” and violated state laws against teaching about race and racism. The College Board initially caved to Florida’s demands and said the course would be heavily redacted, then said it wouldn’t.

At the end of 2023, it released the final version of the course, and it’s…better. But it’s still missing some important concepts. The new course omits any discussion of “structural racism” and makes studying the Black Lives Matter movement — modern Black history by any measure — optional.

That pretty much sums up the state of the fight against censorship and book-banning in this Black History Month: better, but still problematic.

On the plus side, the last few months have brought some very good news.

School board candidates endorsed by the pro-censorship group Moms for Liberty went down to resounding defeats last fall. After Illinois became the first state to prohibit book bans, several states — including Colorado, Kansas, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Washington, and Virginia — introduced their own anti-ban bills.

In December, two Black lawmakers, Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) and Maxwell Frost (D-FL), introduced bills in Congress aimed at fighting book bans. And a federal judge ruled that parts of an Iowa book ban were unenforceable.

But the censorship movement isn’t going away.

Moms for Liberty plans to start its own charter school in South Carolina. In other words, if you won’t let them ban books in your school, they’ll just start their own school. With your taxpayer money.

Meanwhile, librarians nationwide are being targeted by threats and harassment. And the propaganda outfit PragerU continues to pump out the offensive, woefully inaccurate junk it calls “edutainment” for public schools that will buy it.

So there’s still work to do.

Fortunately, the public is overwhelmingly on the right side of this issue. Poll after poll shows that Americans don’t support censorship and book bans in schools. Those of us who want children to have the freedom to learn are the majority.

We understand that kids are better prepared for life — and our country is better prepared to compete globally — when education is historically accurate and reflective of the diversity of our culture. We understand that book banning is un-American and censorship is a tool of dictators.

This majority needs to mobilize and be heard at the ballot box. The defeat of pro-censorship school board candidates in 2023 was a great start. Now we have to take that momentum into the local, state, and national elections this fall.

In the meantime, we also know that public pressure works. A public outcry got the College Board to change its plans for the African American Studies course. And when publisher Scholastic said it would segregate books about the Black and LGBTQ communities at its school book fairs, the public was outraged — and Scholastic reversed course.

Together, we have the power to stop the censors who want to whitewash our history and deprive kids of facts and stories that help them to understand our world. That applies to the Black experience in America, but also the experiences of LGBTQ people, Indigenous peoples, people of diverse faiths, immigrants, people with disabilities, and more.

Civil rights activists have pushed for decades for book publishers and educators to acknowledge and teach our full history, and to awaken our consciousness as a nation. We refuse to go backwards.

Black History Month is a great time for us to commit to using the power that we have to protect the freedom to learn. Our kids, and our country, will be better for it.

---

About the author:
Svante Myrick serves as President and CEO of People For the American Way. Myrick garnered national media attention as the youngest-ever mayor of Ithaca, New York. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.

---

Smith puts on a superb show slipping Spartans past Unity

Braxton Waller (left) congratulates St. Joseph-Ogden's Logan Smith after the basketball team's 73-72 overtime win at Unity (23-3) Friday evening at the Rocket Center. Smith had a career night, dropping a game-high 29 points on the Rockets' home court. The senior sunk the clutch, game-winning free throw in overtime to give SJO a 73-70 advantage with eight seconds on the clock. The Spartans improve to 23-6 and have nearly clinched the conference title (8-0) with one game to go in the regular season. Smith and the Spartans take their show on the road Tuesday to face Paxton-Buckley-Loda. More photos and game recap coming soon.

PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks

---

Leaving it on the floor, Rockets fall in OT

TOLONO - Unity's Henry Thomas drives to the paint in front of St. Joseph-Ogden's Luke Landrus. Thomas, who helped his team rally back from a 13-point third quarter deficit and into overtime, scored 27 points in their Illini Prairie home game against the Spartans. Exhausted, the Rockets (23-3) left it all out on the floor in front of nearly a packed house, suffering their third loss of the season by one 73-72. More photos and game recap coming soon.

Photo: PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks

---

Packed house expected at the Rocket Center

TOLONO - Around 7 p.m. tonight, the event local basketball fans have been waiting for has finally arrived. Unity will put their 23-2 record on the line against the 22-6 Spartans of St. Joseph-Ogden at the Rocket Center.

SJO, undefeated in conference play at 7-0, has defeated their last four opponents by 12 or more points. Earlier this week, the Spartans crushed Rantoul at home by 33 points. Tanner Jacob, who was 2-for-2 from the free-throw line, led the team with 15 points in the senior night win.

Henry Thomas shoots a free throw during Unity's home game against Prairie Central. The senior scored his 1,000th career point earlier in the contest.

Photo: UnityPhotos/Jamie Price

---

Coy Taylor, Tanner Siems, and Luke Landrus also finished in double figures with 14, 13, and 10 points, respectively.

Unity is also on a four-game win streak, posting wins over Newton, Auburn, IVC, and Central Catholic in contests since January 31.

Two weeks ago tonight, Rockets' Henry Thomas reached a prep career milestone while putting up 21 points on Prairie Central. The senior scored his 1,000th point, helping the team avoid a possible overtime decision against the Hawks in a 60-56 win.

Letter to the Editor |Will Illinois lawmakers heed Oregon's failed experiment

Dear Editor,

In 2020, Oregon voters decriminalized possession of small amounts of almost every hard drug. Progressives campaigned in support of this ballot measure, insisting that their state should help treat addiction rather than punish it. The measure passed with 58 percent support.

Now, Oregon's governor has declared a drug emergency, as overdose deaths have been climbing year after year and Democratic lawmakers who first pushed to decriminalize drugs are admitting it isn't working.

Even The New York Times acknowledges that it is out of control, saying in a recent article, “Portland used to be known as one of the most desirable places to live in the United States. But in recent years, the city has been struggling with widespread fentanyl use on its streets, which has led to an increase in homeless encampments and crime.”

Writing in Newsweek, former Presidential drug policy advisor Kevin Sabet says that even while the declaration of a "state of emergency is a step in the right direction, more must be done to undo the harm..."

Will Illinois lawmakers, including self-styled "libertarians," heed this experiment gone awry? Public policies have consequences. Decriminalization leads to more overdose deaths, more crime and more public drug use.

David E. Smith, Executive Director
Illinois Family Institute

Commentary |Appeals court rules against Trump, deciding presidents are not immune from prosecution

by Claire Wofford
Associate Professor of Political Science, College of Charleston

---

---

In a 57-page opinion issued on Feb. 6, 2024, a federal appeals court ruled against former President Donald Trump, deciding that presidents are not immune from criminal prosecution for actions they took while in office.

The decision allows the federal prosecution of Trump for attempting to undermine the 2020 election to continue.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit – two appointed by Democratic presidents and one by a Republican – affirmed the Dec. 1, 2023, ruling of District Court Judge Tonya Chutkan, in which she said that a former president does not enjoy complete immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while in office.

The Hill reported that Trump spokesman Steven Cheung responded to the appeals court ruling by saying, “President Trump respectfully disagrees with the DC Circuit’s decision and will appeal it in order to safeguard the Presidency and the Constitution.” The decision, Cheung said, “threatens the bedrock of our Republic.”

The appeals court panel rejected Trump’s argument that the structure of U.S. government and the demands of the presidency necessitated immunity, instead stating that his claims of “unbounded authority to commit crimes” would “collapse our system of separated powers.” In their words, “President Trump has become citizen Trump,” and therefore had only the defenses available to any criminal defendant, not a special immunity privilege unavailable to anyone else.

As a scholar of judicial behavior and American politics, I have been closely watching this case. The court’s decision, particularly if the Supreme Court allows it to stand, is likely to have ramifications across the U.S. legal and political systems for decades.

‘Divine right of kings’

Trump is the subject of multiple civil and criminal cases in both state and federal courts. He is currently appealing several of them, including one relating to his appearance on the Colorado ballot, which the Supreme Court has already agreed to hear.

In mid-December 2023, the federal government asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on the immunity dispute as well, but the court declined to do so, at least until the appeal was heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

This particular case involves the prosecution of Trump by special counsel Jack Smith. On Aug. 1, 2023, Smith indicted Trump on four counts of violating federal law for his conduct relating to the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights. The proceeding in the appeals court was not about whether Trump committed these crimes but whether he could be prosecuted for them at all.

Trump’s argument centered on a claim of presidential immunity – the notion that a president cannot be subjected to legal action for official conduct or actions taken as part of the job. While there is no explicit language in the U.S. Constitution about such immunity, the Supreme Court had previously ruled in Nixon v. Fitzgerald that presidents can be protected from civil lawsuits for their “official acts.”

The Nixon decision did not control the outcome here, however, because that case involved a civil lawsuit rather than a criminal prosecution. As highlighted during the oral argument in Trump’s appeal, that distinction – of whether it’s a civil or criminal case – makes a world of difference.

Protecting the president from the hassles of civil litigation is one thing; permitting the president, charged in Article 2 of the Constitution with faithful execution of the laws, to be able to break those same laws with impunity is quite another.

That sort of upside-down world is precisely what led District Court Judge Chutkan to issue her sweeping ruling on Dec. 1, 2023, that presidents are not immune from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. As she put it, Trump did not have the “divine right of kings to evade criminal accountability.” The court today agreed with that sentiment.

High stakes

The oral argument before the appeals court on Jan. 9, 2024, was similarly dramatic.

The three judges spent over an hour rigorously questioning both sides, and the language was often sweeping.

Trump’s lawyer spoke of a president’s need to take “bold and fearless” executive action, to not have to constantly “look over their shoulder” for fear of prosecution and of the “republic shattering” consequences of ruling against the former president. Judge Florence Y. Pan raised striking hypotheticals about presidents assassinating political opponents or selling national security secrets to foreign governments. The lawyer for the federal government noted the “frightening future” if presidents were free to violate the law while in office.

The court’s opinion addressed Trump’s argument that future presidents would be unable to take decisive action for fear of prosecution. The judges ruled that the risk of “chilling … Presidential action appears to be low” and was outweighed by the public’s interest in accountability.

The appeals court judges included a passage from a Supreme Court opinion in their decision:

“No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it.”

That principle, the appeals court panel wrote, “applies, of course, to a President.”

The court’s Feb. 6, 2024, decision will have a substantial impact, at least until any final ruling is issued by the Supreme Court.

Trump can be criminally prosecuted for the actions he took to overturn the 2020 election. Whether the case makes it to trial or results in a conviction, what happens to all the other pending cases involving Trump, and whether the former president is returned to the White House, are unanswered questions so far.

The Supreme Court will surely be asked to provide some of those answers.

---

Claire Wofford, Associate Professor of Political Science, College of Charleston This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Commentary |Could tackle football become a thing of the past? Flag football gaining popularity

by Josh Woods
Professor of Sociology, West Virginia University

---

---

One hundred years into the future, what if millions of people gathered every February, not to watch the Super Bowl, but to instead watch the annual world flag football championship?

Once a casual activity played at family reunions, the competitive sport of flag football is “soaring,” “exploding” and “skyrocketing in popularity nationwide,” according to mainstream news outlets.

The number of kids playing flag football has risen dramatically over the past nine years.

Photo: Joshua Choate/Pixabay

---

There’s some data behind the breathless headlines: According to the NFL’s official flag football program, since 2015 the number of kids ages 6 to 12 who play flag football has risen by 38%, to more than 1.5 million.

In my recent book, “Emerging Sports as Social Movements,” I explore nontraditional sports like flag football and disc golf. One of my key findings is that splashy headlines about trendy sports rarely capture a sport’s true reach and staying power.

For every sport like pickleball that gains widespread, sustained popularity, there are several – adventure racing, paintball and wakeboarding – that remain firmly ensconced in their niche.

In the case of flag football, there are a handful of recent trends that truly do point to a promising future. But there are also some red flags that could end up hampering its growth.

A fun, fast, safer alternative

Though its rules are similar to tackle football, flag football is currently gaining attention for what makes it different.

It’s considered a no-contact sport. A “tackle” involves snatching one of two flags that hang from the hips of the ball carrier. While players face injury risks, they sustain far fewer head impacts than athletes who play tackle football.

With the public’s concerns about brain injuries on the rise, many parents are opting for flag football instead of tackle for their kids.

Obscurity is a powerful barrier to emerging sports. But getting noticed may not be a problem for flag football.

The International Olympic Committee announced in October 2023 that flag football would be headed to the Summer Games in Los Angeles in 2028. It’s not clear yet if active NFL players can compete, but if they are eligible – and if the U.S. assembles a “Dream Team” like the Olympic men’s basketball team of 1992 that included superstars Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Magic Johnson – flag football could get on the radar of millions of casual sports fans in 2028.

The Olympic version of flag football is fast-paced

Games are shorter than a typical game of tackle football. Five players compete on 50-yard fields with 10-yard end zones for two 20-minute halves. This format made its first big appearance in the 2022 World Games in Birmingham, Alabama, where the U.S. men won gold and the women took home silver.

The NFL cultivates the grassroots

Although it may come as a surprise, the NFL is embracing flag football and taking its growth seriously.

In 2021, the NFL and Nike committed US$5 million in equipment to support high school flag football teams across the nation. The NFL’s official flag football program operates more than 1,600 local leagues and receives sponsorships from top brands like Visa, Gatorade and Subway.

Most NFL teams are currently supporting the grassroots of flag football with summer camps, clinics and regional tournaments.

During last year’s Super Bowl, an estimated 115 million viewers watched a flag football TV commercial featuring Mexican quarterback Diana Flores bobbing and spinning to evade NFL players and celebrities as they attempted to take her flag.

On Feb. 4, 2024, the Pro Bowl – the NFL’s annual all-star game – sidelined tackle football for the second year in a row. In its place was a 7-on-7 flag football game that aired on ESPN and ABC and streamed on ESPN+.

Prior to that game, on Feb. 2-3, the league also hosted the International NFL Flag Championships as part of the Pro Bowl Games, featuring young athletes from 12 countries.

By the numbers

Flag football may be having a moment, but the question remains: Is the sport actually experiencing a meaningful surge in participation that could extend into the future?

According to figures collected annually by the National Federation of High Schools, 21,980 students played high school flag football in 2023. To put this number in context, however, tackle football attracted 47 times more students – roughly 1 million players – the same year. Track and field, basketball and soccer have roughly 1 million participants apiece.

Interest in flag football seems to be concentrated in a few regions, with roughly 80% of high school players living in just three states: Florida, Georgia and New York.

Though high school participation in flag football has increased steadily since 2007, almost all the growth comes from the girls’ side.

A nationwide sports participation survey finds that the number of casual players of flag football is up, but core participation is down. The study defines “casual players” as those who play fewer than 50 times per year, whereas “core players” participate 50 or more times each year.

The share of Americans who play casually increased by 41% between 2016 and 2022. But core participation declined by 13% during this period.

For sustainable growth, nontraditional sports need to generate excitement among both core and casual players. Top-down investments and marketing strategies may attract new players, but grassroots organizing keeps them coming back.

Take pickleball. In recent years, the sport has generated plenty of cultural clout, with high-profile athletes like LeBron James investing in the professional circuit, and celebrity pickleball players making headlines. There has also been tremendous growth in pickleball’s social and physical infrastructure. For these reasons, both casual and core participation in pickleball more than doubled between 2016 and 2022.

Red sport, blue sport

In the end, the future of flag football may hinge on the public debate over tackle football’s safety. Over the past decade, several studies have found a link between repeated head impacts and the risk for serious brain injuries, including chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE.

Photo: Ty Swartz/Pixabay

---

Yet recent efforts to make tackle football safer for young athletes have been met with fierce resistance from families, fans and organizers. In many regions of the U.S., tackle football is deeply ingrained in the culture, leading to strong opposition to any changes.

New rules to protect NFL players have seeped into mainstream politics. For instance, in 2019, former President Donald Trump dubbed the NFL’s concussion protocol “soft” and said that safety measures were “ruining the game.”

Meanwhile, Democratic state lawmakers in New York, Illinois and California have introduced bills to ban tackle football for kids under 12, often citing flag football as a suitable alternative. None of these bills, however, have passed.

Some research shows that Democrats are more likely to trust concussion science than Republicans. Democrats also pay more attention to news about concussions than Republicans.

As beliefs about the dangers of tackle football become polarized, the perceived benefits of flag football will likely follow suit. As I showed in a recent study of sport popularity in 207 areas of the U.S., flag football is more popular in regions that tend to vote Democratic, with tackle football more popular in Republican areas.

So in addition to going after the resources needed for sustainable growth – investment, organization, visibility, legitimacy – flag football’s advocates will also need to navigate a nation divided by politics.

---

Josh Woods, Professor of Sociology, West Virginia University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ADHD in adults, online quizzes may spread misconceptions and mis-self-diagnosis

by Matt Sheehan
OSF Healthcare

---

We see depression leads to difficulty with concentration

PEORIA - If you spend time on social media, chances are you’ve seen an ad asking, “Do you have ADHD?”

The ads lead to a self-diagnosing quiz and often provides viewers with misconceptions about attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), before they ever see a medical provider.

That’s where Kyle Boerke, PsyD, director of Behavioral Health Outpatient Services for OSF HealthCare, hopes to provide clarity.

ADHD starts in childhood, not in adulthood

“Are adults being diagnosed with ADHD? Absolutely, yes. Is it that they are developing ADHD in adulthood, that’s a no. We know enough about the research, that in order to receive a diagnosis of ADHD, we have to have symptoms starting in childhood. Somewhere near 7 years of age,” Dr. Boerke says.

If you’re having symptoms as an adult that appear to be ADHD, such as lack of focus, inability to sit still, fidgeting, or excessive talking, but you didn’t have these symptoms as a child, Dr. Boerke says you may be experiencing something else.

“We see depression leads to difficulty with concentration,” Dr. Boerke says. “Something inside of them will ring true (if they have ADHD), like if they always struggled with paying attention to their teacher in elementary school.”

What to do about an ADHD diagnosis?

“The easy answer is, we need to seek treatment from a professional,” Dr. Boerke says. “If you have thoughts that you’ve had ADHD symptoms for a long time and you take one of those online quizzes, that’s fine, that can be a starting point.” But he stresses, “I wouldn’t take that quiz and all of a sudden say ‘I have ADHD.’ A great place to start is with your primary care physician.”

Dr. Boerke adds that there’s no official test for ADHD. It’s a whole set of symptoms that include how it’s impacting your daily functioning and for how long.

There are three types of ADHD

1: Predominantly Inattentive

“They’re not going to be jumping all over the place, moving from activity to activity,” Dr. Boerke says. “It’s just going to be some hard times focusing, concentrating or finishing a task because your mind gets switched over to a different task all of a sudden.”

2: Predominantly Impulsive/Hyperactive

“These are the kids that just can’t sit still. They’re up out of their seats in the classroom, and this is really where ADHD in children to adults’ changes,” Dr. Boerke explains. “As we age, we do a better job managing the motoric end of things. It’s not uncommon to see kids have a hard time sitting still, it’s more uncommon to see somebody in a business meeting get up and walk around the room.”

3: Combined Presentation

Dr. Boerke describes the third type this way: “You have inattention, plus you have hyperactivity and impulsivity,” Dr. Boerke says.

Do I need to take medicine if I have ADHD?

Dr. Boerke says medicine alone isn’t the answer.

“The analogy I’ll use is Bear Grylls from Man vs. Wild. He’s an adventurer on a TV show where he goes out into the wild and he has to survive for a number of days,” Dr. Boerke says. “I liken ADHD to being on a Bear Grylls survivor show. He can do it. ADHD management without medication is like Bear gets dropped in the middle of the Florida Everglades and he has to trudge through the swamps, battle the alligators, get past the snakes and manage to get out. Can he do it? Yes, he does. Is it easy? It sure isn’t.”

Dr. Boerke says ADHD medication is as if Bear Grylls was in the Florida Everglades and producers drop him a rescue boat.

“But the reality is, he still has to get himself into the airboat. He has to start it, steer it, and do the work. It’s just easier to do the work,” Dr. Boerke adds. “Medication is not the fix. It can help, but if you don’t change your lifestyle, put in some organizational tools and do the things necessary, we’re still not going to get better and you’re going to rely on the medication.”

If you’re an adult and think you have ADHD, Dr. Boerke says seeking medical attention by a professional is the best first step. Then, your medical provider will help map out a plan moving forward. This can include ADHD medication and working to keep a strict routine to help you manage any ADHD symptoms.

---

Risk of dementia is nearly three times higher the first year after a stroke

DALLAS — Having a stroke may significantly increase the risk of developing dementia. The risk of dementia was the highest in the first year after a stroke and remained elevated over a period of twenty years, according to preliminary research to be presented at the American Stroke Association’s International Stroke Conference 2024. The meeting will be held in Phoenix, Feb. 7-9, and is a world premier meeting for researchers and clinicians dedicated to the science of stroke and brain health.

“Our findings show that stroke survivors are uniquely susceptible to dementia, and the risk can be up to 3 times higher in the first year after a stroke. While the risk decreases over time, it remains elevated over the long-term,” said lead study author Raed Joundi, M.D., D.Phil., an assistant professor at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, and an investigator at the Population Health Research Institute, a joint institute of McMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences.

To evaluate dementia risk after stroke, the researchers used databases at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (University of Toronto, Canada), which includes more than 15 million people in the Canadian province of Ontario. They identified 180,940 people who had suffered a recent stroke — either an ischemic stroke (clot-caused) or intracerebral hemorrhage (bleeding within the brain) — and matched those stroke survivors to two control groups — people in the general population (who had not had a heart attack or stroke) and those who had had a heart attack and not a stroke. Researchers evaluated the rate of new cases of dementia starting at 90 days after stroke over an average follow-up of 5.5 years. In addition, they analyzed the risk of developing dementia in the first year after the stroke and over time, up to 20 years.

The study found:

• The risk of dementia was highest in the first year after stroke, with a nearly 3-fold increased risk, then decreasing to a 1.5-fold increased risk by the 5-year mark and remaining elevated 20 years later.
• Dementia occurred in nearly 19% of stroke survivors over an average follow-up of 5.5 years.
• The risk of dementia was 80% higher in stroke survivors than in the matched group from the general population. The risk of dementia was also nearly 80% higher in stroke survivors than in the matched control group who had experienced a heart attack.
• The risk of dementia in people who had an intracerebral hemorrhage (bleeding in the brain) was nearly 150% higher than those in the general population.

“We found that the rate of post-stroke dementia was higher than the rate of recurrent stroke over the same time period,” Joundi said. “Stroke injures the brain including areas critical for cognitive function, which can impact day-to-day functioning. Some people go on to have a recurrent stroke, which increases the risk of dementia even further, and others may experience a progressive cognitive decline similar to a neurodegenerative condition.”

Each year, about 795,000 people experience a new or recurrent stroke. Approximately 610,000 of these are first attacks, and 185,000 are recurrent attacks, according to the American Heart Association’s Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics 2024 Update. According to the CDC, of those at least 65 years of age, there is an estimated 7 million adults with dementia in 2014 and projected to be nearly 14 million by 2060.

“Our study shows there is a large burden of dementia after acute stroke in Canada and identifies it is a common problem that needs to be addressed. Our findings reinforce the importance of monitoring people with stroke for cognitive decline, instituting appropriate treatments to address vascular risk factors and prevent recurrent stroke, and encouraging lifestyle changes, such as smoking cessation and increased physical activity, which have many benefits and may reduce the risk of dementia,” Joundi said. “More research is needed to clarify why some people who have a stroke develop dementia and others do not.”

A 2023 American Heart Association scientific statement, Cognitive Impairment After Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke suggests post-stroke screenings and comprehensive interdisciplinary care to support stroke survivors with cognitive impairment.

A limitation of the study is that administrative data, hospital records and medication dispensary data were used for the analysis. Researchers were not able to perform cognitive assessments or neuroimaging (noninvasive images of the brain) on stroke survivors, therefore, there is no way to confirm the dementia diagnosis or type of dementia. However, the dementia definition was previously validated and shown to be accurate when compared to medical charts.

---

Unity's All Out A Cappella show Feb. 16

Members of Unity High School's Surreal Sound perform at the 2023 All A Capella show. The annual music booster fundraiser is back.

Photo: UnityPhotos/Jamie Price

---

TOLONO - The Unity Music Boosters are organizing an All Out A Cappella fundraiser on February 16th at the high school auditorium. The event will begin at 7 p.m. and will showcase performances from eight a cappella groups. The funds raised from the event will be used to support music programs in the Unit 7 school district. These programs include music trips, scholarships, costumes, risers, instrument repair and more. Your participation in this event will help to ensure the continued success of these programs.

Members of No Comment perform at the 2022 All A Capella show. The ensemble returns to this year's line-up on February 16.

Photo: UnityPhotos/Jamie Price

---

In addition to UHS' very own Surreal Sound and Unity West's 5th Grade Choir, two groups from Illinois State University and four ensembles from the University of Illinois are slated to perform.

Acafellaz, a tenor-bass Capella group now in its 25th year, and the coed Clef Hangers, both from ISU, will once again lend their award-winning vocal talents at the annual fundraiser.

Concertgoers will also hear select tunes from No Comment, No Strings Attached, the Rip Chords, and the male counterparts, the Xtension Chords. The four groups from the Illinois campus are high-level competitive performers.

Tickets are still available and can be purchased online at https://unitymusicboosters.seatyourself.biz. Admission is $15 for adults and $10 for students/senior citizens.

---

Editorial |Americans are losing the damn minds

Seriously, who in their right mind would want to live under a dictatorship, even if for a day?

An article on the right-leaning website called The Hill published a story yesterday citing a survey from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and YouGov that said, "74 percent of Republican voters said it would be a good idea if Trump follows through on his remarks in which he said he would be a dictator only on the first day of his second term." According to the survey, only 26 percent of Republicans polled, it would be a bad thing.

At least independent voters, dangling from a fourth-story balcony, still have at least a palm on the ledge of sanity. Sixty-five percent said it would be a bad idea as opposed to the 36% who were okay with it.

Pardon me.

When did democracy and the pursuit of quiet life, liberty, and justice go out of vogue? Why are so many conservative voters today ready to wipe their arses with that single-ply paper from 1789 that all but guaranteed their freedom from oppression, the right express themselves, and established a clear path to air their grievances?

Tell me why they spit the largest, thickest, puss-filled loogie they can muster on the graves of their ancestors, many of whom fought and died for our great nation to preserve its ideas and greatness.

A large chunk of the American population is losing its mind. Logic and critical thinking seemingly are becoming a rare commodity. One can make a convincing argument, although admittedly anecdotal at this point, that multiple COVID infections have damaged the prefrontal cortex of a large segment of society and possibly reduced their mental capacity to that of a hamster.

Seriously, who in their right mind would want to live under a dictatorship, even if for a day?

No doubt those who approve of Donald Trump (or anyone else for that matter) having absolute power believe they would be immune to any of the decrees from his 'one day' dictatorial rule. Yes, many of their fellow Americans will suffer, and they are cool with that. What they fail to realize is that this type of power is an infection that can easily corrupt.

English Catholic historian and politician John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton wrote, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

This one-hitter of absolute power would be opium to Trump and those who successfully manipulate him. One day would turn into a few, and later into a week, then a month, and eventually into years. Quietly, those who thought they would not be in the crosshairs would find themselves the targets of oppression and discrimination.

If having a dictatorial government is so great, why do over a million people a year immigrate, legally or otherwise, to the United States from countries with authoritarian rule?

Seriously, who in their right mind would want to live under a dictatorship, even if for a day?

---