* WHAT…South winds 15 to 30 mph with gusts up to 45 mph.

* WHERE…Calabasas and Agoura Hills, Central Ventura County
Valleys, Eastern Santa Monica Mountains Recreational Area, Malibu
Coast, Santa Clarita Valley, Santa Susana Mountains, Southeastern
Ventura County Valleys, Ventura County Beaches, Ventura County
Inland Coast, and Western Santa Monica Mountains Recreational Area.

* WHEN…Until 1 AM PST Wednesday.

* IMPACTS…Gusty winds will blow around unsecured objects. Tree
limbs could be blown down and a few power outages may result.
Gusty winds will blow around unsecured objects. Tree limbs could be
blown down and a few power outages may result.

The post Wind Advisory issued February 10 at 9:27PM PST until February 11 at 1:00AM PST by NWS Los Angeles/Oxnard CA appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

By Sandee LaMotte, CNN

(CNN) — The vast majority of baby foods, drinks and snacks sold in the United States for children ages 6 months to 36 months are ultraprocessed and may contain additives increasingly linked to potential health harms, a new study found.

Over 70% of the 651 foods examined for the study contained additives that emerging research has linked to “inflammation and disruptions in the gut microbiome,” said first author Elizabeth Dunford, an adjunct assistant professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

“What shocked me was the top ingredient in 71% of these baby foods wasn’t a fruit or vegetable — it was one or more additives,” said Dunford, who is also a consultant at The George Institute for Global Health, which created FoodSwitch, an app that contains nutritional information on thousands of products worldwide.

“We know that babies’ guts are not fully developed enough to be able to handle additives in the way an adult stomach could,” she said. “There is no need for these additives; they are simply cosmetic, designed to make the food look more appealing.”

The names and brands of the baby foods were not disclosed in the study published Wednesday in the peer-reviewed journal Nutrients.

An equal number of the baby foods in the study were classified as ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs. Examples include animal and fish crackers, puffs and sweetened yogurts. Experts say manufacturers design ultraprocessed foods to be hyperpalatable making it difficult to “eat just one.”

About 62% of foods eaten by an American child are ultraprocessed, according to a recent report by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Food preferences begin in the first years of life, so the findings of the study are alarming, said Jane Houlihan, research director for Healthy Babies, Bright Futures, an alliance of nonprofits, scientists and donors with a mission of reducing babies’ exposures to neurotoxic chemicals.

“Babies exposed to ultraprocessed foods learn to prefer sugar and artificial flavors over the natural, nutrient-dense foods that set the stage for a lifetime of healthy eating,” Houlihan said. “Baby food companies should be making it easier, not harder, for families to choose healthy options.”

Studies have shown that eating just 10% more calories a day from ultraprocessed food — that’s about one serving — may be associated with a 50% higher risk of cardiovascular disease-related death. There’s also a 55% greater chance of obesity and a 40% higher probability of developing type 2 diabetes.

The Consumer Brands Association, which represents manufacturers of baby food and other products, told CNN in an email there is “currently no agreed upon scientific definition of ultra-processed foods.”

“Food manufacturers adhere to the rigorous evidence-based safety standards and nutrition policy established by the FDA to deliver safe, affordable and convenient products that families depend on every day,” said Sarah Gallo, the association’s senior vice president.

Emerging research on addi

By Veronica Stracqualursi, Alison Main, CNN

(CNN) — Speaker Mike Johnson failed to reinstate a ban on lawmakers’ ability to challenge President Donald Trump’s tariffs when three Republicans crossed party lines to vote with Democrats.

The House sank a procedural vote on Tuesday that contained language blocking votes in the chamber that object to Trump’s tariffs through July. The move opens the door for Democrats to move forward with forcing votes to repeal Trump’s tariffs, in a blow to the administration.

With razor-thin margins in the House, three Republicans – GOP Reps. Thomas Massie, Don Bacon and Kevin Kiley – were enough to sink the vote. Johnson can only afford to lose one Republican vote to advance legislation with his current margin.

The Senate has passed at least three resolutions rebuking Trump’s tariffs, but routinely ran into resistance in the House where members were blocked from forcing votes on the matter.

Bacon said in a statement posted to X, “I don’t like putting the important work of the House on pause, but Congress needs to be able to debate on tariffs.”

The Nebraska congressman went on to say, “tariffs have been a ‘net negative’ for the economy and are a significant tax that American consumers, manufacturers, and farmers are paying. Article I of the Constitution places authority over taxes and tariffs with Congress for a reason, but for too long, we have handed that authority to the executive branch. It’s time for Congress to reclaim that responsibility.”

GOP leaders had argued that lawmakers should allow the Supreme Court time to weigh in.

Speaker Johnson acknowledged the challenges he faces holding together his razor-thin majority after the failed vote.

“Look, this is life with a small majority. I mean, you know, I need unanimity every day, and we didn’t get it tonight,” he told reporters.

“The vast majority of the House Republicans agree wholeheartedly with the president, and we’re going to give him the latitude to continue his trade policy,” he said.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Three House Republicans cross party lines to block effort to shield Trump from challenges to his tariffs appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

The post Hundreds of Students Walk out of San Marcos, Santa Barbara High Schools to Protest ICE appeared first on The Santa Barbara Independent.

Por Piper Hudspeth Blackburn, CNN

El Gobierno de Trump retiró una bandera del orgullo LGBTQ del Monumento Nacional Stonewall en la ciudad de Nueva York, el primer monumento nacional de Estados Unidos dedicado a los derechos LGBTQ, siguiendo una directiva que restringe qué tipos de banderas pueden izarse en los sitios del Parque Nacional.

La remoción es el último cambio al monumento, a medida que el Gobierno busca modificar lo que está expuesto en los parques nacionales de todo el país e imponer las opiniones del presidente Donald Trump a otras instituciones culturales e históricas de EE.UU.

De acuerdo con un memorando del Servicio de Parques Nacionales (NPS, por sus siglas en inglés), la agencia prohíbe “banderas y gallardetes que no sean de la agencia”, que no sean la bandera de EE.UU. o la bandera del Departamento del Interior. La directora interina del NPS, Jessica Bowron, firmó la medida en enero, y existen excepciones para banderas históricas, banderas militares o banderas de naciones tribales reconocidas federalmente dentro de los parques.

CNN se ha comunicado con el Departamento del Interior y el NPS, así como con un copropietario del Stonewall Inn, para obtener comentarios.

Gay City News fue el primero en informar sobre la remoción de la bandera del orgullo LGBTQ.

En febrero de 2025, el NPS eliminó referencias a personas transgénero y queer en su página web para el monumento Stonewall, que abarca el área alrededor del Stonewall Inn en Greenwich Village.

El icónico bar gay es ampliamente considerado el lugar donde nació el movimiento moderno de derechos LGBTQ en EE.UU.: fue el sitio de una redada policial en 1969 que provocó una feroz reacción de sus clientes y dio lugar a días de protestas y enfrentamientos entre manifestantes LGBTQ y la policía. El expresidente Barack Obama designó el monumento en 2016 durante su segundo mandato.

Líderes locales han criticado la medida del Gobierno, y el alcalde de Nueva York, Zohran Mamdani, dijo que estaba “indignado” por la remoción. “Nueva York es el lugar de nacimiento del movimiento moderno de derechos LGBTQ+, y ningún acto de borrado cambiará o silenciará esa historia”, dijo en una publicación en X el martes.

El presidente del municipio de Manhattan, Brad Hoylman-Sigal, dijo a CNN: “Es parte del intento del Gobierno de Trump de remodelar el Servicio de Parques de una manera que se conforme con su base de apoyo de derecha, excluyendo a los grupos minoritarios y las personas LGBTQ”.

Hoylman-Sigal dijo que estaba trabajando para izar la bandera nuevamente en el sitio del monumento federal el jueves, a pesar de la nueva directriz federal.

“Vamos a tratar simplemente de izarla de nuevo. Puede que la retiren. Puede que nos impidan hacerlo, puede que agentes federales nos lo impidan, pero sin duda lo intentaremos en el espíritu de Stonewall”, agregó.

El líder de la minoría en el Senado, Chuck Schumer, de Nueva York, calificó la remoción de la bandera como “profundamente indignante” y agregó en una publicación en X: “Si hay algo que sé sobre este último intento de reescribir la historia, avivar la división y la discriminación, y borrar el orgullo de nuestra comunidad, es esto: esa bandera volverá. Los neoyorquinos se encargarán de ello”.

El memorando