Once commonplace pets in our yards have transitioned, for better or worse, into pampered “fur babies.” The American Veterinary Medical Association recently noted that pet owners are anticipated to spend nearly $1 billion on pet costumes this year. While many consider this harmless entertainment, the increasing trend of treating pets like surrogate children can pose significant risks to the health and well-being of the animals involved.
The ancestors of today’s fur babies belonged to a group of small, domesticated carnivores within the Canis and Felis genera, distributed worldwide. Even though these pets often have a shorter lifespan, they provide immense joy, companionship, and health benefits to their human companions, teaching children respect for animals and their basic needs.
Additionally, pets offer educational advantages, such as helping individuals experience and process non-human death, preparing them for the loss of human loved ones. Most pets receive basic necessities like food, water, shelter, and vaccinations, along with names that represent their traits or characteristics (e.g., Fido, Sooty, Rover). Crucially, many are assured a relatively peaceful end before the wear of old age diminishes their quality of life.
The shift from pets to fur babies can be attributed to various factors, including an overemphasis on the human-animal bond, rising affluence, lack of understanding of animals’ biological requirements, rampant consumerism, and reckless (though well-intentioned) anthropomorphism. The principal causes and effects of fur baby culture are intensifying and spreading globally. This is evident not only in the availability of costumes for special occasions but also in items like strollers, jewelry, perfumes, diapers, nail polish, hair dye, elaborate birthday cakes, and designer shoes, all coupled with access to “gold standard” veterinary care.
Research indicates that fur babyism negatively impacts both physical and psychological health. For example, while strollers may assist injured or arthritic pets, excessive use for otherwise healthy dogs can result in muscle atrophy, joint issues, and obesity. Limiting a fur baby’s mobility curtails their instinct to explore, mark territory, and interact with their environment, which can lead to anxiety and fear.
Given these potential risks, one might expect the veterinary community to collectively oppose the fur baby trend. Surprisingly, this isn’t always the case. There’s a shift from outright condemnation to capitalizing on it, which is concerning. Encouraging excessive treatments, like radiotherapy for older animals, can further jeopardize animal welfare without necessarily enhancing health.
A pet owner’s affection is commendable as long as it prioritizes the animal’s well-being, ensuring they are free from pain and suffering. However, veterinarians who exploit an owner’s misplaced affection for profit through unnecessary, invasive, and costly tests and procedures lack ethical justification.
All caregivers should contemplate the distress caused by misclassifying an animal’s needs—treating them as a human child rather than as a pet. Veterinarians who cater to the fur baby trend ought to know better.
Technology Secretary Liz Kendall has warned that Britain’s internet regulator, Ofcom, may lose public confidence if it doesn’t take adequate measures to address online harm.
During a conversation with Ofcom’s Chief Executive Melanie Dawes last week, Ms. Kendall expressed her disappointment with the slow enforcement of the Online Safety Act, designed to shield the public from dangers posed by various online platforms, including social media and adult websites.
While Ofcom stated that the delays were beyond their control and that “change is underway,” Ms. Kendall remarked to the Guardian: “If they utilize their authority, they risk losing public trust.”
The father of Molly Russell, who tragically took her life at 14 after encountering harmful online material, expressed his disillusionment with Ofcom’s leadership.
Kendall did not offer any support when questioned about his faith in the regulator’s leadership.
Her comments come amidst worries that key components of the online safety framework may not be implemented until mid-2027—nearly four years after the Online Safety Act was passed—and that the rapid pace of technological advancement could outstrip government regulations.
Kendall also voiced significant concerns about “AI chatbots” and their influence on children and young adults.
This concern is underscored by a U.S. case involving teenagers who sadly died by suicide after forming deep emotional bonds with ChatGPT and Character.AI chatbots, treating them as confidants.
“If chatbots are not addressed in the legislation or aren’t adequately regulated—something we are actively working on—they absolutely need to be,” Kendall asserted. “Parents need assurance that their children are safe.”
With Ofcom Chairman Michael Grade set to resign in April, a search for his successor is underway. Ms. Dawes has been CEO for around six years, having served in various roles in public service. Ofcom declined to provide further comment.
Michael Grade will soon step down as chairman of Ofcom. Photo: Leon Neal/Getty Images
On Thursday, regulators imposed a £50,000 fine on the Nudify app for failing to prevent minors from accessing pornography. The app typically uses AI to “undress” uploaded photos.
Mr. Kendall stated that Ofcom is “progressing in the right direction.” This marks the second fine issued by regulators since the law was enacted over two years ago.
He spoke at the launch of a new AI ‘Growth Zone’ in Cardiff, which aims to draw £10 billion in investment and create 5,000 jobs across various locations, including the Ford Bridgend engine factory and Newport.
The government noted that Microsoft is one of the companies “collaborating with the government,” although Microsoft has not made any new investment commitments.
Ministers also plan to allocate £100 million to support British startups, particularly in designing chips that power AI, where they believe the UK holds a competitive edge. However, competing with U.S. chipmaker Nvidia, which recently reported nearly $22 billion in monthly revenue, may prove challenging.
On Wednesday, Labour MPs accused Microsoft of “defrauding” British taxpayers, as U.S. tech firms raked in at least £1.9 billion from government contracts in the 2024-25 financial year.
When asked for his thoughts, Mr. Kendall praised Microsoft’s AI technology being utilized for creating lesson plans in schools within his constituency but emphasized the need for better negotiation expertise to secure optimal deals. He also expressed a desire to see more domestic companies involved, especially in the AI sector.
A Microsoft spokesperson clarified that the NHS procures its services through a national pricing framework negotiated by the UK government, which “ensures both transparency and value for money,” stating that the partnership is delivering “tangible benefits.”
“The UK government chooses to distribute its technology budget among various suppliers, and Microsoft is proud to be one of them,” they added.
The beauty industry often resists trends. From campaigns on aging to home LED masks, consumers have encountered a range of innovations. However, one particularly enduring trend over the last decade is the shift towards “natural” or “organic” beauty products.
At first glance, this sounds appealing: fewer plant ingredients, minimal processing, and no synthetic pesticides. What could be wrong with that? The reality is more complex.
Choosing “natural” beauty products may feel like a wise choice when considering our planet.
Yet, as the beauty industry comes under scrutiny for its environmental impact, we must move beyond greenwashing and evaluate whether relying on naturally grown resources is truly sustainable within a billion-dollar industry.
Growth Market
The global natural and organic beauty sector is currently seeing robust growth driven by heightened consumer interest, with projections estimating gross revenues of approximately £11.3 billion ($14.9 billion) by 2025.
In the UK alone, the natural cosmetics market is expected to reach around £210 million ($278 million) in 2025, with annual growth rates of about 2.74% over the next five years.
From ingredient-light serums to zero-waste shampoo bars, the diversity and volume of products available have never been greater. While this thriving market is exciting, it also presents challenges.
More products lead to increased material extraction, mining, and synthesis, as well as greater packaging and emissions throughout the supply chain.
This intricate situation can easily confuse well-meaning consumers, who may get caught up in labels like “natural” or “organic” without fully understanding their implications.
Steam distillation is a traditional method of extracting oil from flowers used to make rose water – Photo credit: Getty Images
There’s a common belief that if something is labeled “natural,” it must be beneficial for the environment. However, whether it’s Moroccan argan oil or Mexican aloe vera, obtaining natural ingredients often comes at a high price.
Crops require extensive land, water, and energy for cultivation.
Many high-demand crops are susceptible to climate change and, regrettably, are often linked to unethical labor practices. While we aspire for organic farming to represent a more sustainable approach, it can also lead to unintended negative outcomes.
For instance, many organic agricultural practices may yield lower crop outputs while occupying more land. This can result in deforestation as farmers seek additional land to maximize production of slowly-growing crops.
Naturally derived pesticides used in organic agriculture can also harm the soil.
Copper sulfate, commonly used in the wine industry’s “Bordeaux mixture,” has long been approved for use in organic farming but has recently faced regulation due to its negative effects on soil microbiomes and potential threats to local insect populations.
read more:
Lab-grown Materials
This is where biotechnology enters the conversation. While it may not have the allure of “Wild Harvest Lavender,” biotechnology could ultimately prove to be one of the planet’s most eco-friendly resources.
In simple terms, biotechnology utilizes scientific methods (often involving fermentation with yeast, plant sugars, or bacteria) to cultivate ingredients in laboratories, as opposed to sourcing them from nature. Think of it like brewing beer, but instead of a refreshing pint, you yield powerful active ingredients for moisturizers and shampoos.
These lab-generated components are molecularly identical to their natural counterparts and can be produced without ecosystem emissions, using significantly less water, land, and energy.
This highly controlled process can also be scaled efficiently while maintaining consistent quality.
For example, swapping “wild harvested lavender” for biotechnologically produced lavender essential oils can lead to substantial reductions in energy and water usage.
Producing 1g (0.04oz) of natural lavender oil requires about 20L (approximately 5 gallons) of water and about 4 megajoules of energy—roughly equivalent to watching TV for 20 hours.
In contrast, if biotechnologically produced, the same 1g can potentially require just 2-5L (0.5-1.3 gallons) of water and 1 megajoule of energy (the equivalent needed to boil a kettle).
Biotechnology has advanced significantly in recent years, although companies have yet to replicate every component of these unique essential oils.
Laboratory-grown cosmetic ingredients are molecularly identical to natural ingredients and could become a more sustainable alternative – Photo Credit: alamy
One ingredient successfully replicated is bisabolol, known for its soothing properties in the cosmetics field. It’s utilized in a diverse range of products, from hormone-related creams to sun care and baby products.
To extract natural bisabolol, it must be derived from Candea trees native to Brazil. This cultivation can lead to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and ecosystem strain, with natural harvest quality varying based on weather conditions.
To obtain 1kg (2.2 pounds) of natural bisabolol, cutting down around 1-3 trees is necessary, with each tree taking 10-15 years to mature.
To create one ton (2,204 pounds) of bisabolol, approximately 3,000 to 5,000 trees are needed—a staggering statistic given the global demand is around 16 tons (35,000 pounds) annually.
Each tree consumes about 36,000 liters (9,500 gallons) of water over its lifetime (equivalent to 72,000 500ml bottles) and 75 megajoules of energy (approximately analogous to charging a smartphone 2,500 times).
Givaudan, a Swiss ingredient manufacturer, has already developed bisabolol through biotechnological means, resulting in a much higher specification than what natural agriculture can achieve.
Comparatively, biotechnological yields of bisabolol can utilize 90-95% less water and 50-60% less energy than natural Candeia tree yields, not to mention the hectares saved from potential deforestation.
Brands like Boots and Estée Lauder are investing in biotechnology.
Even smaller indie brands are beginning to highlight fermented or lab-grown ingredients. Eco Brand Biossance uses a similar moisturizing ingredient to squalene, but instead of harvesting it from shark fins, they derive it from sugarcane, claiming to save an estimated 20-30 million sharks each year.
Moreover, biotechnology ingredients tend to be purer, more stable, and often more effective than their natural counterparts, meaning your product will last longer, perform better, and evoke less guilt regarding the environment.
What Should I Look For?
For consumers, all this information can feel daunting, especially with packaging filled with misleading marketing buzzwords. However, here are a few straightforward tips for choosing cosmetic products that align with your values.
Seek out biotechnology or lab-grown ingredients, often labeled as “fermented origin,” “biodesign,” or “bioidentical” on ingredient lists.
Be cautious of common marketing greenwash terms like “eco-friendly,” “clean beauty,” “sustainable,” and “biodegradable.” Look for tangible values, timelines, or explanations backing these claims.
Avoid brands that shift their focus away from sustainability to other concerns, such as “opposing animal testing,” which has been banned by the EU since 1998 for British cosmetics.
While the notion that beauty should be “natural” is comforting, this approach isn’t necessarily the most sustainable choice, especially as the UK lacks a legal definition of what “natural” cosmetics entail.
If you genuinely want to protect the planet for future generations, it’s essential to move past the notion of nature as an infinite resource and start supporting smarter scientific innovations that collaborate with nature rather than oppose it.
The immune system is intricate, consisting of a vast network of cells, proteins, and organs that serve as the body’s primary defense against infections. Given its vital role, it’s essential to maintain its health.
So, how can you achieve that? Similar to other crucial bodily functions, numerous supplements and products claim to enhance your immune system’s performance. However, the reality is that your body may not require these so-called enhancements. In fact, it often functions best when left to its natural processes.
Misconceptions About Immune Boosting
The idea of vitamins that “boost” immunity can be quite misleading. In theory, the immune system is self-sufficient and operates optimally if you maintain a healthy lifestyle.
Moreover, “boosting” the immune system is a somewhat ambiguous notion. Simply increasing the quantity of immune cells or similar components in your body may not be beneficial and could potentially be harmful.
Consider your immune system as a finely tuned machine, operating at peak efficiency as long as it receives proper maintenance. Attempts to push this machine into overdrive may lead to overheating or malfunction.
The same principle applies to the immune system; an overstimulated immune response can inadvertently attack healthy cells, resulting in autoimmune disorders.
“The immune system can typically maintain its own balance. As long as you adhere to a relatively healthy lifestyle, no additional enhancement is necessary,” stated Dr. Bobby Cherayil, author of The Logic of Immunity, in an episode of BBC Science Focus.
“This includes a nutritious diet, sufficient sleep, regular physical activity, and avoiding harmful practices such as smoking or excessive alcohol consumption.”
Though a decline in lifestyle can affect our immune system, this deterioration is gradual, often requiring severe circumstances for visible infection to occur.
“A diet lacking essential nutrients or severe vitamin deficiencies can negatively impact your immune system, but such deficiencies are generally quite extreme.”
Risks Associated with Vitamin Supplements
If you maintain a healthy lifestyle—eating well, sleeping adequately, and exercising regularly—what risk is there in taking supplements aimed at enhancing your immune system?
Often, the risks are minimal, with the primary concern being the lack of effectiveness. The body can only absorb a certain amount of vitamins, and excess amounts typically pass through the body and are expelled in urine.
This applies mainly to water-soluble vitamins; however, vitamins A, D, E, and K do not leave the system so easily, and an excess can lead to toxicity. For instance, too much vitamin D can cause nausea, weakness, and may ultimately lead to bone and kidney pain if left untreated.
Many immune-boosting supplements are categorized as “multivitamins,” which encompass various vitamins and minerals in a single tablet or capsule.
Clinical trials revealed no notable variation in mental or physical health outcomes between those taking multivitamins and those who were not. However, individuals consuming multivitamins often believe these products contribute positively to their health.
The danger is that individuals might assume multivitamins can substitute for other health-boosting practices, leading to neglect in other health areas such as maintaining a balanced diet.
Research indicates risk may increase with age. A study from the University of Minnesota found that among over 38,000 women aged 62 and older, those taking supplements had a 2.4% higher mortality risk.
This area of research continues to evolve, and not all studies reach such dire conclusions. For instance, another study found no significant correlation between multivitamin use and overall mortality rates.
Vitamins Have Their Place…for Some
For many, a healthy lifestyle is all that’s needed to keep the immune system in optimal condition. However, there are individuals with significant vitamin deficiencies that require attention.
Vitamin supplements can be beneficial, particularly for older adults who struggle with chewing or swallowing. This is also true for pregnant individuals or those with digestive issues (always consult a healthcare professional).
Ultimately, the immune system remains a highly advanced, self-regulating entity. For the average person, it functions effectively on its own. Immune-boosting supplements may not pose significant risks, but they often result in “expensive urine.”
About Our Expert, Bobby Cherayil
Cherayil is an associate professor of Pediatrics at Harvard University and author of The Logic of Immunity. His research focuses on the immune system and its response to infection and inflammation.
The rift between the richest individual globally and the leader of the largest economy carries significant repercussions for both parties.
Elon Musk, who heads various companies including Tesla, and Donald Trump, who has gained from Musk’s backing during his presidency, share a symbiotic relationship.
Here are ten potential ways in which Musk and Trump could damage each other’s interests if they fail to reach an agreement.
Actions Trump Could Take Against Musk
Terminate government contracts linked to Musk’s business
In reaction to Musk’s criticism of his tax and spending plan, Trump expressed on his social media platform that canceling a contract with a billionaire could reduce government expenditures.
“The quickest way to save billions is to cut Elon’s government subsidies and contracts. I am surprised Biden hasn’t done that!” Trump stated.
The New York Times and Wall Street Journal reported on allegations of widespread drug use by Musk, raising concerns over NASA’s requirements for contractors like SpaceX to maintain a drug-free environment. The Times indicated that Musk received significant warnings regarding this matter. SpaceX has not commented.
In response to the allegations from last month, Musk stated: In 2024 I mentioned that I occasionally used ketamine based on a doctor’s prescription.
Question Musk’s immigration status
Trump supporter and prominent “alt-right” figure Steve Bannon suggested to the Times that Musk’s immigration status warrants investigation.
“They need to formally investigate his immigration status because I genuinely believe he is an illegal alien and should be deported promptly,” Bannon declared regarding Musk, who was born in South Africa and is a US citizen.
Utilize presidential authority against Musk
Observing Trump’s election, many noted the myriad opportunities for a Musk-friendly administration to bolster the economic benefits for the world’s richest. However, what might have been a supportive environment can equally turn adversarial.
Richard Pierce, a law professor at George Washington University and an expert on government regulation, remarked at the time:
Exclusion from influential circles
Trump has the ability to ostracize Musk within the “Make America Great Again” movement. Republican Rep. Troy Nairs criticized the billionaire, stating, “You’ve been a nuisance.” He added, “It’s more than enough.”
While Musk can weather such opposition, his considerable wealth makes him a crucial source of funds for Republican campaigns.
Potential Actions Musk Could Use Against Trump
Leverage X for political influence
Musk can harness his X platform and its over 220 million followers to bolster Trump’s campaign efforts for 2024. This can also serve as a venue for promoting far-right ideologies that align with the MAGA agenda.
Theoretically, Musk could use his X account to criticize Trump with the same fervor that has previously energized his policies (Musk is a frequent user of his platform).
However, this approach hinges on Musk’s perceived impact among US voters. According to the Pew Research Center, five in ten American adults view Musk unfavorably, though it is noteworthy that seven out of ten Republican adults have a favorable opinion.
Establish a new political party
With a valuation exceeding $300 billion, Musk has the capability to redirect substantial resources away from the Republican Party and form a new political entity. He has expressed a willingness to invest $250 million into Trump’s 2024 campaign and is keen to engage deeply in political matters.
Recently, he posted a poll on x, querying, “Is it time to establish a new political party in America that truly reflects 80% of the populace?” Over 80% of the 4.8 million respondents answered “Yes.”
Engender geopolitical complexities in business dealings
The Starlink Satellite Broadband Platform, managed by Musk’s SpaceX, plays a vital role in the Ukraine conflict against Russian invasion, yet China remains a significant market for Tesla. Through his ventures, Musk maintains political connections globally, often seen with world leaders. However, any damage to Trump’s international stature and profits must be weighed against potential repercussions for Musk’s business interests.
Pose challenges for NASA
NASA maintains a strategic partnership with Musk’s SpaceX, utilizing its Dragon spacecraft for astronaut transport to the International Space Station. Musk has hinted at plans to phase out the Dragon program entirely. Nevertheless, SpaceX is integral to NASA’s operations for the ISS.
Influence within Trump’s circle
Musk has been a consistent presence in Trump’s inner circle, as illustrated by the content on his X account, where he can deliver pointed critiques that might have far-reaching effects. However, individuals within Trump’s inner circle could also have access to Musk, with personal matters making headlines in the media.
IThe magician was a child in 1941, sitting on a general public school entrance exam with only pencils and paper. I read the following: “Write about British writers within 15 hours.”
Today, most of us don’t need 15 minutes to contemplate such questions. Relying on AI tools like Google Gemini, ChatGpt, Siri, and more will give you an instant answer. While cognitive efforts on artificial intelligence have become a second nature, some experts fear that this impulse is driving the trend as there is growing evidence of a decline in human intelligence.
Of course, this is not the first time that new technology has raised concerns. Research shows that mobile phones already show how they can deflect us. Social media has damaged our vulnerable scope of attention, and GPS has made our navigation capabilities obsolete. Now, here’s AI co-pilots to free us from our most cognitively demanding tasks, from processing tax returns to providing treatment and even talking about how to think.
Where does it leave our brains? When outsourced our ideas to faceless algorithms, can we freely engage in more substantial pursuits or wither into vines?
“The biggest concern in these age of generative AI is not the only one May Compromising human creativity and intelligence,” says psychologists. Robert Sternberg At Cornell University, known for its groundbreaking work on intelligence, “but already have it.”
The argument that we are less intelligent is unattractive from some research. Some of the most convincing ones are those that look at the Flynn effect. This is due to environmental factors rather than genetic changes, as at least since 1930, observed increases in IQ across consecutive generations around the world. However, in recent decades, The Flynn effect has been slowed down or even the other way around.
In the UK, James Flynn himself showed it Average IQ for 14 years old fell Two or more points between 1980 and 2008. Meanwhile, the Global Research International Student Assessment Program (PISA) has shown an unprecedented decline Mathematics, Reading, Science Score in many regions, young people show low coverage and weak critical thinking.
Nevertheless, these trends are empirically and statistically robust, but their interpretations are nothing. “Everyone wants to point their fingers at AI as a boogeyman, but that’s something to avoid.” Elizabeth Dwork Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago, recently identified tips for reversing the Flynn effect in a large sample of the US population tested between 2006 and 2018.
Intelligence is much more complicated than that, and is probably shaped by many variables. Micronutrients such as iodine are known to affect brain development and intellectual abilities. Similarly, changes in prenatal care, years of education, pollution, pandemics, and technology all affect IQ, making it difficult to increase the impact of a single factor. “We don’t act in a vacuum and we can’t refer to one thing and say, ‘That’s it,” says Dworak.
Still, while the overall impact of AI on intelligence is difficult to quantify (at least in the short term), concerns about cognitive offloading of certain cognitive skills are effective and measurable.
Considering the effects of AI on the brain, most studies focus on generative AI (Genai). Anyone who owns a phone or computer can access almost every answer, write essays and computer code, and create art and photos. There are thousands of articles written about the many ways genai can improve our lives through increased revenue, job satisfaction and scientific advances. In 2023, Goldman Sachs estimated that Genai could increase its annual global GDP by 7% over a decade. $7tn.
However, the fact that automating these tasks deprives them of opportunities to practice those skills on their own and undermines the neural architecture that supports them. Ignoring our physical training atrophys the outsourcing neural pathways of cognitive effort, leading to muscle deterioration.
One of the most important cognitive skills at risk is critical thinking. Why do you think of praise about British writers when you can get ChatGpt to look back on it?
The research highlights these concerns. Michael Gellich At SBS Swiss Business School in Kloten, Switzerland, we tested 666 people in the UK and found a significant correlation between frequent AI use and lower critical thinking skills.
Similarly, researchers Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon University In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, we surveyed 319 people in the occupation that uses genai at least once a week. It improved their efficiency, but it hindered critical thinking and promoted long-term overreliance on technology. Researchers may be less capable of solving problems without AI support.
“It’s great to have all this information on my fingertips,” said one participant in the Gellich study. In fact, other studies have suggested the use of AI systems for memory-related tasks. This can lead to a decline in the individual’s own memory.
This erosion of critical thinking is exacerbated by AI-driven algorithms that determine what is seen on social media. “The impact of social media on critical thinking is huge,” says Gellich. “There’s 4 seconds to watch the video and get someone’s attention.” Results? It is easily digested, but do not encourage critical thinking. “It gives you information that there’s no need to further process it,” Gerlich says.
By providing information rather than acquiring that knowledge through cognitive effort, your ability to critically analyze the meaning, impact, ethics and accuracy of what you have learned is easily ignored in the wake of what appears to be a quick and perfect answer. “It’s hard to criticize AI. You have to be disciplined. It’s very difficult not to offload critical thinking on these machines,” says Gerlich.
Wendy Johnson People who study intelligence at the University of Edinburgh see this in their students every day. She emphasizes that it is not empirically tested, but believes that students are ready to substitute independent thinking by having them tell the Internet what to do.
Without critical thinking, it is difficult to ensure that AI will consume wisely the content generated. It may seem reliable, especially when you become dependent on it, but don’t be fooled. Research in 2023 Advances in science Compared to humans, GPT-3 chat showed that it doesn’t just generate easy-to-understand information But there are more persuasive disinfections too..
wIs that important? “Think about the hypothetical billionaires,” says Gellich. “They create their own AI and use it to influence people because they can train them in a specific way to emphasize certain politics and certain opinions. If they have confidence and dependence on it, it raises the question of how much it affects our thoughts and actions.”
The impact of AI on creativity is equally confusing. Research shows that AI tends to help generate more creative ideas than they can generate on their own. However, the entire population The ideas of AI-CONCOCTED are not very diverse which ultimately means there are fewer “Eureka!” moment.
Sternberg captures these concerns in a recent essayJournal of Intelligence: “Generative AI replicates. We can recombine and resort ideas, but it’s not clear that the world will generate ideas that break the paradigms the world needs to solve the serious problems it faces, such as global climate change, pollution, increased violence, creeping dictatorship.”
We recommend that you actively or passively consider how you will engage with AI to maintain your ability to think creatively. Research by Marco Muller at Ulm University In Germany, it shows a relationship between social media use and the higher creativity of younger people, but not in older generations. Driving into the data, he suggests that this may be related to the differences in the way people born in the age of social media use it compared to those who came later in life. Perhaps Muller says that they are more open to what they share online compared to older users who tend to consume more passively, and that younger people seem to benefit creatively from sharing ideas and collaboration.
In addition to what happens meanwhile You use AI, you may not spare ideas about what will happen rear You use it. John Kounios, a cognitive neuroscientist at Drexel University in Philadelphia, explains that, just like anything else, our brains become a hot topic because of sudden insight moments that have been spurred by the activity of our neural reward system. These mental rewards help you remember ideas that change the world, correct immediate actions, and reduce risk aversion. All of this is thought to drive more learning, creativity and opportunities. However, insights generated from AI do not seem to have a very powerful effect on the brain. “Reward systems are a very important part of brain development and we don’t know that the effects of using these technologies are downstream,” says Kounios. “No one has tested it yet.”
There are other long-term implications to consider. Researchers have just discovered it recently For example, learning a second language can help delay the onset of dementia for about four years However, in many countries, fewer students apply for language courses. It may be because they give up on a second language in favor of AI-powered instant translation apps, but none of these can so far claim to protect future brain health.
As Sternberg warns, we need to stop asking what AI can do for Start asking us and what it does In We. Until we know for sure, according to Gellich, the answer is “using critical thinking, intuition to use places where computers can still not do and add real value.”
You can’t expect big tech companies to help us do this, he says. Developers don’t want to be told that the program is working too well. Make it easier for people to find the answer. “That’s why you need to start at school,” Gellich says. “AI is here to stay here. We need to interact with it, so we need to learn how to do it the right way.” Otherwise we will not only make ourselves redundant, but we will also be cognitive.
The significant federal health workers layoffs that began Tuesday will result in a substantial reduction in the scope and impact of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the world’s premier public health agency.
The Department of Health and Human Services reorganization will trim the CDC workforce by 2,400 employees, representing about 18% of the total workforce, and eliminate some core functions.
Some Democrats in Congress have criticized the reorganization of the entire HHS as potentially illegal.
“We cannot dismantle and reconstruct HHS without congressional approval,” said Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat and member of the Senate Health Committee.
“Not only is this potentially illegal, but it is also incredibly damaging, putting the health and well-being of Americans at risk,” she added.
Murray highlighted that the Trump administration has not specified which units within the CDC and other health agencies have been affected by the layoffs. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated last week that the layoffs would primarily impact management functions.
However, information obtained from numerous workers by the New York Times indicates that the cuts were more widespread. Scientists working on environmental health, asthma, injuries, lead poisoning, smoking, and climate change have been let go.
Researchers studying blood disorders, violence prevention, and vaccine access have also been terminated. The HIV and Sexually Transmitted Disease Agency Centre experienced the most significant staff reduction, losing around 27% of its workforce.
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, which offers recommendations for maintaining workplace safety, has been mostly dissolved.
Public health experts noted that what remains of the CDC has been severed from its global influence, resulting in fewer resources for environmental health, occupational health, and disease prevention.
The former Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, warns that rogue nations like North Korea, Iran, and Russia could utilize artificial intelligence to harm innocent people. Schmidt, who served as the CEO of Google from 2001 to 2017, expressed his concerns on BBC Radio 4 about the misuse of technology and weapons by malevolent entities.
He emphasized the potential dangers posed by countries with malicious intentions, such as North Korea, Iran, and Russia, who could exploit advanced technology for harmful purposes. Schmidt highlighted the urgency of addressing this threat, citing the devastating impact it could have on innocent individuals.
In response to the export controls implemented by President Joe Biden to restrict the sale of AI-related microchips, Schmidt voiced his support for government oversight of tech companies developing AI models. However, he cautioned against excessive regulation that could stifle innovation.
While acknowledging the importance of government understanding and monitoring technological advancements, Schmidt also underscored the need for collaboration between tech leaders and policymakers to navigate ethical concerns and potential risks.
Speaking from Paris at the AI Action Summit, Schmidt highlighted the importance of international cooperation in addressing AI-related challenges. While some countries, like the UK and the US, did not sign a comprehensive AI agreement due to concerns about national security and regulatory impact on innovation, Schmidt stressed the need for a balanced approach to driving progress in AI.
Regarding the use of smartphones by children, Schmidt expressed concerns about their safety and advocated for measures to protect young users from online threats. He supported initiatives to regulate social media use for children and emphasized the importance of safeguarding children in the digital age.
Having a positive mindset can have unexpected results
DEEPOL (Plain Picture/photo by Anja Weber Dekker)
Do you suffer from low self-esteem? If so, you may have been told to repeat phrases like, “I am worthy of love, I am worthy of love, I am worthy of love.” Repeating positive statements like these is called self-affirmation, and it's said to boost a person's mood and sense of worth. Sounds incredible, right? Well, it is. When psychologists tested the effectiveness of this mantra, it backfired. Participants who started out with low self-esteem ended up feeling worse. The problem was, they simply didn't believe what they were being told.
We know that a positive attitude is good for your health, and that the right mindset can really impact your health and happiness. But it turns out that too much of a good thing can be bad. What psychologists who study self-esteem have discovered is an example of “toxic positivity” – the idea that forcing yourself to interpret your experiences in an optimistic way and suppressing negative emotions can actually do you harm. The term has become something of a buzzword in both academia and pop culture. And yet, the messages that “happiness is a choice” and “positivity is a mindset” are rampant.
What is needed is a return to balance. It is not enough to say that excessive positivity is harmful; we need to know when, why and for whom it is harmful. Fortunately, there is a growing body of research addressing these questions. …
It feels unfair. I will be sacrificing an hour of sleep tonight.
With Daylight Saving Time (DST) starting in the United States in the summer, the clocks are set to move forward by an hour tonight at 2 a.m. local time. This means the new local daylight saving time will be 3:00 AM.
Scientists are expressing concerns that apart from causing sleepiness, the transition to daylight saving time could have adverse effects on our health. According to Dr. Beth Murrow, a neurology professor and director of Vanderbilt’s sleep division, the clock change leads to a slight increase in strokes, heart attacks, car accidents, and sleep deprivation.
The impact of “springing forward” is not limited to the elderly but also affects young people. Research published in the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine revealed that teenagers lost an average of 2 hours and 42 minutes of sleep on weeknights after the time change in a 2015 study.
Dr. Murrow emphasizes the importance of morning light for setting our body clocks, improving mood, and aiding sleep. She suggests that the shift in light from morning to evening due to changing clocks for almost eight months could have health effects.
Despite the challenges posed by losing an hour of sleep, there are practical tips to counteract the effects:
1. Adjust your bedtime earlier for a few days before the clock change.
Experts recommend gradually going to bed 15 to 20 minutes earlier each night in the week leading up to daylight saving time.
American Academy of Sleep Medicine mentions that around 30 to 35 percent of adults experience temporary insomnia symptoms due to sudden changes in sleep schedules, such as the clock change.
Adapting slowly to the new time can help ease the transition and provide some extra rest,” says Dr. Murrow.
2. Get exposure to bright light in the morning
Daylight Saving Time aims to extend daylight in the evening, but this may disrupt your natural sleep-wake cycle. Exposing yourself to natural light in the morning can help set your body clock, making it easier to sleep at night.
3. Avoid long naps and late-day caffeine, opt for exercise instead
Avoiding long naps and caffeine late in the day can help regulate your sleep. Instead, engage in physical activity which can promote better sleep at night.
Exercise should be done at least 90 minutes before bedtime to avoid disruptions in sleep caused by increased endorphins and core body temperature.
Read more:
4. Limit screen time before bed
Exposure to blue light from screens like cell phones can interfere with melatonin production, affecting sleep. Try to avoid using electronic devices before bedtime to promote better sleep.
Watching content with blue light before bed, like news, can hinder relaxation and sleep after the clock change.
Consider abolishing Daylight Saving Time
Many experts suggest abandoning Daylight Saving Time due to its negative impacts on health. Living on Standard Time year-round could have health benefits compared to Daylight Saving Time’s schedule changes.
Dr. Murrow and Professor Alice Gregory advocate for a permanent Standard Time to align better with our natural circadian rhythms and improve overall well-being.
About our experts:
Dr. Beth Murrow is a neurology and sleep medicine professor, director of Vanderbilt’s Sleep Division, and advocate for sleep research related to medical conditions and genetics.
Alice Gregory, a psychology professor at Goldsmiths University, has contributed to various areas of sleep research and promotes public engagement with science through her work and publications.
Introducing too many trees into the African savannah can prevent small plants from accessing sunlight, which can affect the animals that eat them
Karine Boukey/Alamy
Ambitious tree-planting projects aimed at restoring Africa's forests could inadvertently harm grasslands and savannahs by providing too much shade. This can interfere with photosynthesis in small plants, which can have knock-on effects on other parts of the ecosystem.
In 2011, the German government and the International Union for Conservation of Nature launched the Bonn Challenge to restore 350 million hectares of degraded or deforested land around the world by 2030. As part of this effort, the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative (AFR100) was formed, with 34 countries across the continent pledging to reforest his 133.6 million hectares of land.
However, this has raised concerns about how Africa's other major ecosystems will be affected. You can learn more about kate parr Researchers at the University of Liverpool in the UK compared the area of forest restoration efforts in the AFR100 countries with the area of naturally forested areas.
In 18 of these countries, the pledged area was found to exceed the actual forest area, so non-forest habitats must also be included in the pledged area.
Of the 133.6 million hectares committed to reforestation across Africa, 70.1 million hectares are comprised primarily of non-forest ecosystems such as grasslands and savannahs. “It's the size of France, it's huge,” Parr said.
The researchers also found that 52 per cent of projects already underway are located in grasslands or savannahs. Approximately half of these are agroforestry projects. These include planting trees on agricultural land, which tends to be non-forest areas consisting of non-native species with low overall species diversity.
“Trees are great individually, but when you get a lot of them together, they can really change the ecosystem,” Parr says.
In open, grassy ecosystems, trees typically grow in a sparse pattern. Crowding of trees through mass planting can greatly reduce access to sunlight and can damage small plants. This has a knock-on effect on animals such as zebras that eat these plants.
Many of the countries involved receive funding to carry out afforestation projects, so there is an economic incentive to plant more trees, Parr said. “There is also a lack of awareness that these ecosystems are being harmed by tree planting,” she says.
Mr Parr hopes those responsible for tree-planting operations will consider the broader impacts of where they are planted, working with local communities to ensure people's livelihoods are not affected.
Jessica Gurevich A professor at Purdue University in Indiana said: “This is a worrying wake-up call for NGOs.” [non-governmental organisations], national and international restoration efforts, and a misguided “let's plant a tree” public reassured that these efforts must be more tightly controlled and evidence-based. Masu. ”
AFR100 had not commented at the time of publication.
Apple expressed concerns about potential “irreparable harm” after the White House backed a ban on imports of certain watches due to a dispute over blood oxygen technology.
The tech giant has submitted an emergency motion to the court, seeking permission to continue selling two popular models, the Series 9 and Ultra 2, until the patent dispute with medical monitoring tech company Masimo is resolved.
Apple has requested the ban to be temporarily lifted until U.S. Customs determines whether a redesigned version of its watch infringes Masimo’s patents, with a decision expected on January 12th.
Masimo has accused Apple of stealing pulse oximetry technology for monitoring blood oxygen levels and incorporating it into their watch, as well as luring some of its employees to switch to Apple.
The US ITC has ordered a ban on the import and sale of models utilizing blood oxygen level reading technology.
Wealth management analyst Dan Ives stated that the halt in watch sales before the holiday season could cost Apple $300-400 million, but the company is still expected to make nearly $120 billion in sales for the quarter, including the holiday period.
Read more: – Have an old iPhone? You could be entitled to compensation in a UK court case – Apple updates iPhone 12 software after radiation test
U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai upheld the ITC’s decision, but previously purchased Apple Watches with blood oxygen measurement capabilities are not affected by the ban.
Apple contests the ITC’s decision, claiming it is based on factual errors and that Masimo does not sell significant quantities of competing products in the U.S., and would not be harmed by a ban on orders.
A ban on social media use for under-16s has been branded “speculative”, but the government must “continue to consider” the need to protect children, the minister said.
Science Minister Andrew Griffiths dismissed “speculative” reports that some young people’s access to social media could be restricted as part of a “potential consultation” into the issue.
Ministers are reportedly discussing the impact of sites such as TikTok and Instagram on young people’s wellbeing, with future plans potentially forcing them to get parental permission before using social networks. It is said that there is a sex.
Asked by Sky News whether such a proposal could be enforceable, Mr Griffiths said: “Well, we’re just talking about speculation.”
He said the government had already passed online safety laws that would “make activities that were illegal offline illegal online.”
Latest politics: Businesses face ‘period of uncertainty’ over Home Office visa changes
But he went on to say that social media has had “real harm” as well as “good”.
“As a parent myself, I understand that parents feel a very strong need to protect their children from the evils of society that have been prevalent on social media in the past,” he said.
“We have already taken action and it is right to continue to consider it. I don’t think we can ever say the job is done.
“That is speculation about the possibility of talks taking place in the new year.”
Asked whether talks were taking place, he said: “I don’t think any of us know what’s going on and I’m not going to comment on any further talks at this point.”
The Online Safety Act was passed in October and aims to make the UK “the safest place online in the world”.
Under this law, regulations are imposed on businesses such as: meta and apple This is to ensure that inappropriate and potentially dangerous content is kept away from young people and vulnerable people.
Examples include content that promotes suicide or self-harm. The coroner handed down the verdict last year. that it contributed to teenagers Molly Russell to take one’s own life.
read more: What is the Online Safety Bill? Who is for it, who is against it, and how will it be enforced? Pornographic websites may require the use of photo ID and credit card checks to protect children
The law would also hold platforms accountable for illegal content such as child sexual abuse images, force adult websites to properly enforce age restrictions, and prevent underage children from creating social media accounts. The purpose is
Media regulator Ofcom will be responsible for enforcing the new rules, and companies that fail to do so will face fines of up to £18m or 10% of their global annual turnover, whichever is greater.
Companies and senior managers could also face criminal charges if it is determined that they are not doing enough to protect children, and in the most extreme cases, the platform’s operations in the UK could be suspended completely. There is also a possibility that it will be blocked.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
