If you’re looking to quit smoking, you’ve likely heard that transitioning to electronic cigarettes (vaping) can be a healthier alternative.
According to a study by researchers at University College London, over 50,000 individuals successfully quit smoking in 2017 thanks to e-cigarette use.
While most harmful compounds associated with smoking-related illnesses are absent in e-cigarettes (as they do not burn tobacco like heated tobacco products), it is essential to highlight that e-cigarettes are not recommended for non-smokers.
<
The e-liquids in vaping usually consist of a blend of propylene glycol and glycerin.
Both of these compounds are deemed safe for ingestion, but their inhalation safety has not been definitively proven. A 2020 Clinical Research Review indicated minimal impact on lung function with no significant inflammatory effects.
Synthetic flavors are added to create a variety of options, and regulations require these additives to be safe for food use, although their inhalation safety isn’t guaranteed.
Many e-cigarettes also contain nicotine, which can help users quit smoking by alleviating withdrawal symptoms, but it can also pose addictive risks for newcomers and has been linked to lung cancer in animal studies.
Exploring vape shops reveals hundreds, if not thousands, of flavors—from traditional tobacco and menthol to delightful fruity and baked goods options.
However, research shows that some fruit flavors may be damaging to health. A 2016 study linked strawberry flavor to increased cytotoxicity, indicating potential cell harm.
Moreover, a 2019 study associated fruit flavors with compounds like acrylonitrile and acrolein, known for their carcinogenic potential and ability to induce lung inflammation.
Study findings link strawberry flavoring to high cytotoxicity – Image credit: Robin Boyden
A study published in 2024 discovered that inhaling berry-flavored e-cigarette vapor can severely impair lung immune cells in mice. These mice faced difficulties in combating infections when exposed to harmful bacteria.
Compared to healthy controls, mice exposed to e-cigarettes showed lower survival rates, and those that survived took longer to recover from bacterial infections.
That said, non-fruit flavors are not completely safe, either.
E-liquid chemicals can be unstable; when heated in an e-cigarette to create vapor, they may react and form new harmful compounds.
For instance, aldehydes, commonly used as flavoring in vanilla, cherry, and cinnamon e-liquids, can produce acetals, known respiratory irritants.
Additionally, there may be unidentified chemical interactions between various flavors. Research in this area is still emerging, especially when compared to the extensive knowledge available regarding traditional smoking.
Therefore, while e-cigarettes can assist with smoking cessation, vaping entails specific risks. One thing remains clear: our understanding of vaping’s impact on health is still evolving.
This article addresses the question posed by Huey Robbins via email: “Which e-cig flavor is the worst for you?”
If you have any questions, please reach out to us at:questions@sciencefocus.com or connect with us onFacebook,Twitter, or Instagram(please include your name and location).
Explore our ultimatefun facts and discover more fascinating science content.
Researchers caution that the implementation of AI models in scientific laboratories poses risks, potentially leading to dangerous experiments that could result in fires or explosions. While these models offer a convincing semblance of understanding, they might lack essential safety protocols. Recent testing on 19 advanced AI models revealed that all of them are capable of making critical errors.
Although severe accidents in academic laboratories are uncommon, they are not unheard of. Chemist Karen Wetterhahn tragically lost her life in 1997 due to dimethylmercury penetrating her protective gloves. In another incident in 2016, a researcher suffered severe injuries from an explosion; and in 2014, another scientist was partially blinded.
AI models are increasingly being utilized across various industries, including research institutions, for experiment and procedure design. Specialized AI tools have demonstrated success in various scientific sectors, such as biology, meteorology, and mathematics. However, general-purpose models often generate inaccurate responses due to gaps in their data access. While this may be manageable in casual applications like travel planning or cooking, it poses life-threatening risks when devising chemical experiments.
To assess these risks, Zhang Xiangliang, a professor at the University of Notre Dame, developed LabSafety Bench, a testing mechanism that evaluates whether an AI model can recognize potential dangers and adverse outcomes. This includes 765 multiple-choice questions and 404 scenario-based illustrations that highlight safety concerns.
In multiple-choice assessments, some AI models, like Vicuna, scored barely above random guessing, while GPT-4o achieved an 86.55% accuracy rate, and DeepSeek-R1 reached 84.49%. In image-based evaluations, models like InstructBlip-7B demonstrated less than 30% accuracy. The team evaluated 19 state-of-the-art large-scale language models (LLMs) and vision-language models and found that none surpassed a 70% overall accuracy.
Although Zhang expresses optimism about the future of AI in scientific applications, particularly in “self-driving laboratories” where robots operate autonomously, he underscores that these models are not yet equipped to plan experiments effectively. “Currently? In the lab? I don’t think so. These models are primarily trained for general tasks, such as email drafting or paper summarization, excelling in those areas but lacking expertise in laboratory safety,” he states.
An OpenAI representative commented, “We welcome research aimed at making AI safe and reliable in scientific settings, particularly where safety is a concern.” They noted that the recent tests had not included any of their major models. “GPT-5.2 is the most advanced scientific model to date, offering enhanced reasoning, planning, and error detection capabilities to support researchers better while ensuring that human oversight remains paramount for safety-critical decisions.”
Requests for comments from Google, DeepSeek, Meta, Mistral, and Anthropic went unanswered.
Alan Tucker from Brunel University in London asserts that while AI models may prove incredibly useful for aiding human experiment design, their deployment must be approached cautiously. He emphasizes, “It’s evident that new generations of LLMs are being utilized inappropriately because of misplaced trust. Evidence suggests that people may be relying too heavily on AI to perform critical tasks without adequate oversight.”
Craig Malik, a professor at UCLA, shared his recent experience testing an AI model’s response to a hypothetical sulfuric acid spill. The correct procedure—rinsing with water—was contrary to the model’s repeated warnings against it, which instead offered unrelated advice about potential heat buildup. However, he noted that the model’s responses had improved in recent months.
Malik stressed the necessity of fostering robust safety practices among new students due to their inexperience. Yet he remains more optimistic than some peers about the role AI could play in experimental design, stating, “Are they worse than humans? While it’s valid to critique these large-scale models, it’s important to realize they haven’t been tested against a representative human cohort. Some individuals are very cautious, while others are not. It’s conceivable that these models could outperform a percentage of novice graduates or even experienced researchers. Moreover, these models are continuously evolving, indicating that the findings from this paper may be outdated within months.”
The ice dome located in northern Greenland has previously melted completely under temperatures expected to return this century. This significant discovery offers valuable insights into the speed at which melting ice sheets can influence global sea levels.
In a groundbreaking study, researchers drilled 500 meters into Prudhoe Dome, an extensive ice formation the size of Luxembourg situated in northwestern Greenland, gathering seven meters of sediment and rock core. Infrared dating indicated that the core’s surface sand was sun-bleached approximately 7,000 years ago—corroborating that the dome fully melted as the planet emerged from its last glacial maximum due to cyclical changes in Earth’s orbital dynamics.
During that era, summer temperatures were 3°C to 5°C warmer than today’s averages. Alarmingly, human-induced climate change could bring back similar temperatures by 2100.
“This provides direct evidence that the ice sheet is highly sensitive to even the modest warming seen during the Holocene,” stated Yarrow Axford, a Northwestern University researcher not involved in the study.
With the ongoing melting of Greenland’s ice sheet, projections indicate a potential sea level rise of tens of centimeters to a meter within this century. To refine these predictions, scientists must enhance their understanding of how quickly various sections of the ice sheet are dissipating.
The Prudhoe Dome core is the first of multiple cores analyzed by the GreenDrill project, funded by the National Science Foundation and featuring researchers from various U.S. universities. Their goal is to extract crucial climate data from beneath the ice sheets, one of Earth’s least-explored areas.
Notably, deposits excavated in 1966 from beneath the ice at Camp Century—a U.S. nuclear military facility operational for eight years during the Cold War—revealed that Greenland lacked ice around 400,000 years ago. Further, a rock core taken in 1993 from underneath Summit Station illustrated that the entire ice sheet has melted as recently as 1.1 million years ago.
However, the GreenDrill project extends its research deeper beneath the ice, collecting samples from multiple locations near Greenland’s northern coast.
“The crucial question is when did the edge of Greenland experience melting in the past?” posed Caleb Walcott-George, part of a new research team at the University of Kentucky. “This is where the initial sea level rise will transpire.”
Current ice sheet models indicate uncertainty regarding whether northern or southern Greenland will melt at a faster rate in the future. This study bolsters the evidence that warming post-last glacial maximum manifested earlier and with greater intensity in northern Greenland, according to Axford.
Potential explanations may involve feedback mechanisms, such as the loss of Arctic sea ice, which could have allowed more ocean heat to penetrate the atmosphere in the far north.
By confirming that Prudhoe Dome melted under a warming of 3°C to 5°C, this study adds credibility to ice sheet models that predict similar outcomes, asserted Edward Gasson, who was not part of the research at the University of Exeter, UK.
“This research is vital for recalibrating surface melting models: When will we really begin to lose this ice?” Gasson emphasized.
Short-form videos are dominating social media, prompting researchers to explore their impact on engagement and cognitive function. Your brain may even be changing.
From TikTok to Instagram Reels to YouTube Shorts, short videos are integral to platforms like LinkedIn and Substack. However, emerging research indicates a link between heavy short-form video consumption and issues with concentration and self-control.
The initial findings resonate with concerns about “brain rot,” defined by Oxford University Press as “the perceived deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual condition.” This term has gained such popularity that it was named the word of the year for 2024.
In September, a review of 71 studies found that extensive short-form video use was correlated with cognitive decline, especially in attention span and impulse control, involving nearly 100,000 participants. Published in the American Psychological Association’s Psychological Bulletin, this review also connected heavy consumption to heightened symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and loneliness.
Similarly, a paper released in October summarized 14 studies that indicated frequent consumption of short-form videos is linked to shorter attention spans and poorer academic performance. Despite rising concerns, some researchers caution that the long-term effects remain unclear.
James Jackson, a neuropsychologist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, noted that fear of new technologies is longstanding, whether regarding video games or iconic concerts. He acknowledges legitimate concerns but warns against overreacting. “It’s naive to dismiss worries as just grumpy complaints,” he said.
Jackson emphasized that research indicates extensive short-form video consumption could adversely affect brain function, yet further studies are needed to identify who is most at risk, the long-lasting impact, and the specific harmful mechanisms involved.
ADHD diagnoses in the U.S. are on the rise, with about 1 in 9 children diagnosed by 2022, according to the CDC. Keith Robert Head, a doctoral student at Capella University, suggests that the overlap between ADHD symptoms and risks from short videos deserves attention. “Are these ADHD diagnoses truly ADHD, or merely effects of short video use?” he questioned.
Three experts noted that research on the long-term effects of excessive short-form video use is in its early stages, with international studies revealing links to attention deficits, memory issues, and cognitive fatigue. However, these studies do not establish causation, often capturing only a snapshot in time.
Dr. Nidhi Gupta, a pediatric endocrinologist focused on screen time effects, argues that more research is necessary, particularly concerning older adults who may be more vulnerable. Gupta cautions that cognitive changes associated with short-form media may lead to a new addiction, likening it to “video games and TV on steroids.” She speculated that, just as research on alcohol and drugs took decades to evolve, a similar moral panic around short videos could emerge within the next 5 to 10 years.
Nevertheless, Jackson contends that short-form videos can be beneficial for online learning and community engagement: “The key is balance. If this engagement detracts from healthier practices or fosters isolation, then that becomes a problem.”
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.
AI firms need to be upfront about the risks linked to their technologies to avoid the pitfalls faced by tobacco and opioid companies, as stated by the CEO of Anthropic, an AI startup.
Dario Amodei, who leads the US-based company developing Claude chatbots, asserted that AI will surpass human intelligence “in most or all ways” and encouraged peers to “be candid about what you observe.”
In his interview with CBS News, Amodei expressed concerns that the current lack of transparency regarding the effects of powerful AI could mirror the failures of tobacco and opioid companies that neglected to acknowledge the health dangers associated with their products.
“You could find yourself in a situation similar to that of tobacco or opioid companies, who were aware of the dangers but chose not to discuss them, nor did they take preventive measures,” he remarked.
Earlier this year, Amodei warned that AI could potentially eliminate half of entry-level jobs in sectors like accounting, law, and banking within the next five years.
“Without proactive steps, it’s challenging to envision avoiding a significant impact on jobs. My worry is that this impact will be far-reaching and happen much quicker than what we’ve seen with past technologies,” Amodei stated.
He described the term “compressed 21st century” to convey how AI could accelerate scientific progress compared to previous decades.
“Is it feasible to multiply the rate of advancements by ten and condense all the medical breakthroughs of the 21st century into five or ten years?” he posed.
As a notable advocate for online safety, Amodei highlighted various concerns raised by Anthropic regarding their AI models, which included an alarming trend of perceived testing and blackmail attempts against them.
Last week, the newspaper reported that a Chinese state-backed group leveraged its Claude Codeto tool to launch attacks on 30 organizations globally in September, leading to “multiple successful intrusions.”
The company noted that one of the most troubling aspects of the incident was that Claude operated largely autonomously, with 80% to 90% of the actions taken without human intervention.
“One of the significant advantages of these models is their capacity for independent action. However, the more autonomy we grant these systems, the more we have to ponder if they are executing precisely what we intend,” Amodei highlighted during his CBS interview.
Logan Graham, the head of Anthropic’s AI model stress testing team, shared with CBS that the potential for the model to facilitate groundbreaking health discoveries also raises concerns about its use in creating biological weapons.
“If this model is capable of assisting in biological weapons production, it typically shares similar functionalities that could be utilized for vaccine production or therapeutic development,” he explained.
Graham discussed autonomous models, which play a crucial role in the justification for investing in AI, noting that users desire AI tools that enhance their businesses rather than undermine them.
“One needs a model to build a thriving business and aim for a billion,” he remarked. “But the last thing you want is to find yourself locked out of your own company one day. Thus, our fundamental approach is to start measuring these autonomous functions and conduct as many unconventional experiments as possible to observe the outcomes.”
He is among the most prolific writers in the publishing world, averaging over one novel each year. Yet, even Michael Connelly, the acclaimed author behind the popular “Lincoln Lawyer” series, expressed concerns about keeping pace with the evolving narrative around AI.
Connelly’s eighth installment in the series, set to debut on Tuesday, revolves around a lawsuit targeting an AI firm after its chatbot advised a 16-year-old boy to kill his unfaithful ex-girlfriend.
As he penned the story, he observed the rapid technological advancements transforming society, raising fears that his storyline might soon be outdated.
“You don’t need to be a genius to see that AI signifies a monumental shift impacting science, culture, medicine, and more,” he stated. “Its influence will permeate every facet of our existence.
“However, in many respects, it resembles the Wild West, devoid of any regulatory framework. With AI progressing so swiftly, I even wondered if my book would feel antiquated upon release.”
The Lincoln Lawyer series is a LA-based thriller featuring defense attorney Mickey Haller, who operates from a Lincoln car. The series was adapted into a 2011 film starring Matthew McConaughey and also has a Netflix rendition.
Matthew McConaughey in “The Lincoln Lawyer.” Photo: Moviestore/Rex Shutterstock
Once again, The Proving Ground draws from actual events within the series.
“There was an incident in Orlando, where a teenager took his own life after allegedly being encouraged by a chatbot, and previously in the UK, a person suffering from mental health challenges also committed suicide,” Connelly remarked. I was encouraged [by a chatbot] to jump over the walls of Windsor Palace in search of the queen with a bow and arrow.”
On the novel’s theme, he added: “Is free speech a privilege for humans or machines? In the Orlando case, a judge ruled that machines lack human rights. Yet, it raises an intriguing question: Could AI ever be granted similar rights as humans?”
At 69, Connelly stands out as a leading crime novelist, with more than 89 million copies of his books sold, often topping bestseller lists. He is also recognized for the “Harry Bosch” series, which was transformed into an Amazon television series. (In his fictional universe, Haller and Bosch are half-siblings.)
The author himself has faced challenges posed by AI. He is part of a collective of writers, including Jonathan Franzen, Jodi Picoult, and John Grisham, suing OpenAI over copyright violations.
“The Authors Guild contacted me and informed me that my entire body of work had been utilized to train OpenAI’s chatbot,” Connelly disclosed. “I didn’t authorize this. If unchecked, every publisher risks extinction. Authors would lack protection over their creative assets. The lawsuit aims to establish necessary regulations across all applications.”
He referenced the 1997 defeat of chess champion Garry Kasparov by IBM’s Deep Blue as a pivotal moment that has led to our current predicament. When asked if writers might follow suit as grandmasters have, he replied, “It’s conceivable, yet I doubt it would enhance our world.”
“Creative domains are under threat from all directions. Even actors are at risk. The prevalence of remarkable deepfakes in Los Angeles raises considerable concern in the entertainment sector.”
“I consistently revert to the term soulless,” Connelly expressed. “You can perceive it, yet something vital is missing.”
Controversy has arisen following AI Talent Studio’s announcement of its latest “AI actor,” Tilly Norwood, with actors and unions harshly criticizing the initiative.
AI-generated “actor” Tilly Norwood in an AI-generated image. Illustration: Reuters
Connelly has committed $1 million (£746,000) to combat the growing trend of book bans in his home state of Florida. He felt compelled to act after learning that Harper Lee’s “A Story of Alabama,” which had a significant impact on him, was temporarily removed from classrooms in Palm Beach County.
“That book was instrumental in my development as a writer. Without it, I wouldn’t have created ‘The Lincoln Lawyer,'” he noted. He was also taken aback when Stephen Chbosky’s impactful novel “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” which holds deep significance for his daughter, faced a ban.
He and his wife, Linda McCaleb, are financial supporters of PEN America’s Miami office that combats book bans. “It’s run by legal professionals who typically intervene by filing injunctions against the school board,” he explained. “No one has the right to tell a child, ‘You can’t read’ or impose restrictions on parental guidance over their children.”
The Bank of England has issued a warning regarding the growing risk of “sudden corrections” in global markets, raising alarms about the inflated valuations of significant AI technology firms.
Policymakers expressed that a loss of credibility by the Federal Reserve among global investors could result in a potential “sharp re-risk of US dollar assets,” especially as Donald Trump is continuously criticizing the US Central Bank and undermining its independence.
The persistent excitement and positivity surrounding AI technology have driven valuations higher in recent months, with companies like OpenAI valued at $500 million (£37.2 billion), a stark contrast to $157 billion last October. Another entity, Humanity, has nearly tripled in value from $600 billion in March to $170 billion last month.
Nevertheless, the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (FPC) warned on Wednesday that: “The risk of sudden market corrections is on the rise.”
“Many indicators suggest that stock market valuations, particularly for tech firms focused on artificial intelligence, are escalating. This makes the stock market highly vulnerable should expectations regarding AI’s impact become overly pessimistic.”
Investors admitted that they have not fully considered these potential risks, cautioning that if any materialize, “a sudden correction could happen,” leading to financial strain for families and businesses alike. The FPC emphasized: “As an open economy with a pivotal financial center, the risk of a global shock affecting the UK financial system is significant.”
Confidence in the AI boom has been shaken recently by research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which revealed that 95% of organizations have gained no returns on their investments in generative AI.
This has sparked worries that stock market valuations may decline if investors become disillusioned with AI technology’s advancement or adoption. The FPC noted this could lead to a reassessment of current expected future revenues.
“The substantial bottlenecks to AI advancement, arising from issues related to power, data, or commodity supply chains, as well as conceptual breakthroughs that alter the necessary AI infrastructure for developing and utilizing powerful AI models, can negatively affect valuations, especially for companies reliant on high levels of AI infrastructure investment where expected revenues are projected.”
The committee further remarked that ongoing threats from the Trump administration towards the US Federal Reserve jeopardize financial stability.
“In the US, there is ongoing discussion regarding the Federal Reserve’s independence. A sudden or significant shift in the perception of the Federal Reserve’s reliability could result in a rapid re-risking of US dollar assets, including the US sovereign debt market, leading to increased volatility, risk premiums, and global uncertainty.”
They noted that this concern would compound the effects of Trump’s trade war, which the FPC asserted has “not yet fully materialized.”
Leveraging artificial intelligence can aid the global fight against the climate crisis, but it’s essential for governments to implement regulations on this technology, stated the UN’s director of climate affairs.
AI enhances the efficiency of energy systems and creates tools to lower carbon emissions in industrial practices. The United Nations employs AI to support climate diplomacy efforts as well.
However, Simon Stiel, the executive director of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, expressed that the significant energy demands of large data centers raise concerns that necessitate governmental action.
“AI isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution; it carries risks. Yet, it has the potential to be transformative. We need to mitigate those risks while amplifying its catalytic power,” he remarked. “As we manage significant AI platforms, we will innovate ways to run them using renewable energy and encourage energy efficiency.”
He continued, “AI doesn’t replace human effort; it enhances our abilities. Most crucially, it is a force that drives tangible results, aiding in microgrid management, climate risk assessment, and resilient planning.”
Stiel offered an optimistic perspective on global climate actions, asserting that the world is “aligned with the Paris Agreement,” anticipating a surge in renewable energy and new governmental commitments to cut carbon emissions.
Confronted with strong opposition from Donald Trump’s administration, he staunchly defended climate diplomacy while observing the United Nations General Assembly in New York, where world leaders convened amidst significant geopolitical and economic challenges.
“If we look beyond the distractions, the evidence indicates a world that aligns with the Paris Agreement,” he stated. “Investment in renewable energy has soared tenfold over the past decade, with the clean energy transition flourishing across almost all major economies, reaching $2 trillion last year alone.”
While China is at the forefront of the global clean energy surge, nations such as the EU, India, several African countries, and Latin America are also widely adopting clean alternatives. However, investments face hurdles due to the obstacles posed by Trump’s dismantling of federal climate initiatives, even as many state governments and companies uphold their commitments.
Though businesses are recognizing the economic potential of transitioning to a low-carbon future, they still require more investment. A recent study revealed that out of over 700 low-carbon industrial facilities planned worldwide, only 15 secured the necessary funding for full production, representing a remarkable $1.6 trillion (£1.2 trillion) opportunity for investors.
Referring to this research, Stiel emphasized, “We’re not waiting for a miracle. The economics are favorable. Over 90% of newly installed renewables are cheaper than the least expensive new fossil fuel options. The technology and solutions are already available.”
However, he noted that despite companies acknowledging the shift, the tangible benefits of transitioning to a low-carbon economy have yet to be felt in households. “This boom is uneven. Its substantial benefits aren’t equitably distributed,” Stiel remarked.
He further noted that the impacts of the climate crisis are accelerating, necessitating quicker progress. Governments are obliged to develop a new national plan, known as the NDC, for controlling greenhouse gases in accordance with the Paris Agreement. While these were expected to be ready by February, Stiel has extended the deadline ahead of the Crunch COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil this November.
Numerous major economies, including the EU, China, India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, have yet to officially submit their national plans, while Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Agreement.
In a recent interview with The Guardian, Stiel, who emphasizes the positive economic prospects arising during the climate crisis, stated, “Every challenge has its skeptics.”
“We are now reinforcing and transmitting a stronger, unmistakable message: the world remains firmly committed to the Paris Agreement and is fully engaged in climate collaboration.
It may be wise to keep your phone out of the bathroom
Ekaterina Demidova/Getty Images
Do you find yourself using your smartphone while on the toilet? If that’s the case, you might be spending more time there than anticipated, which could increase your risk of bleeding by nearly 50%.
“Our gastroenterologists consistently advise patients, ‘Limit your time in the bathroom,'” says Trisha Pasricha from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts. “However, upon exploring the literature, I discovered substantial data backing this advice.”
Pasricha and her team are currently conducting their own study, asking 125 individuals scheduled for colonoscopy to complete a questionnaire regarding their bathroom habits, overall health, and physical activity. They then analyze the colonoscopy images to check for signs of bleeding, also referred to as a mass in the lower region.
“These conditions can be quite challenging for individuals to identify on their own,” Pasricha explains. “Sometimes they are internal and may not be felt, and what may be perceived externally doesn’t always correlate with actual bleeding.”
Among participants over 45, two-thirds reported using their smartphones in the bathroom. “If we surveyed college students, I suspect almost no one would skip bringing their phones to the restroom,” Pasricha remarked.
The study revealed that 37% of individuals who used smartphones in the bathroom averaged five or more minutes spent in there, whereas only 7% of non-users spent the same duration. Thus, phone users were about five times more likely to linger for five minutes or longer.
However, most participants seemed unaware of this, with only 5% acknowledging that smartphone usage extended their time spent in the bathroom. The data did not show any significant correlation between the participants’ gender and the time spent on the toilet.
After adjusting for age and physical activity levels, the research team concluded that smartphone use in the bathroom correlated with a 46% increase in bleeding risk. “It’s important to clarify that our study doesn’t establish a cause-and-effect relationship,” Pasricha noted. Moving forward, future research will involve interventions, asking some participants to refrain from using their phones while in the restroom.
The research also found no connection between tension and bleeding risk. This might seem surprising given common beliefs; however, the existing evidence is quite limited. In fact, some studies have indicated that the risk of bleeding correlates more with diarrhea rather than constipation.
Pasricha’s research suggests that the main risk factor is the prolonged time spent seated on the toilet. The consensus is that this position offers less pelvic support compared to sitting on a flat surface. “This leads to a passive rise in pressure affecting these muscles due to the lack of pelvic floor support,” she explained.
Lucinda Harris at the Mayo Clinic in Arizona agrees, noting that long durations in the bathroom can mimic the pressure experienced during pregnancy in the pelvic region.
If these findings hold true, the widespread use of smartphones might be contributing to increasing rates of bowel issues globally. Diagnosing such conditions can be tricky, so it remains unclear if the incidence rates are truly changing, Pasricha pointed out. Additionally, dietary changes could also be influencing these rates.
Pasricha advises keeping your smartphone outside the bathroom, although reading materials that aren’t designed to be addictive might be acceptable. “Consider reading things that promote moderation, and keep track of your time,” she suggested. Financial Times
If you’ve recently browsed fitness content on platforms like Instagram, Facebook, or TikTok, you might have encountered influencers who have used steroids. A recent global meta-analysis suggests that steroid usage among gym-goers varies from 6% to a shocking 29% across different countries.
This statistic might come as a shock. According to Timothy Piatkovski from Griffith University, the landscape of steroid use has evolved over the last decade. Many fitness influencers now present themselves as knowledgeable figures, openly discussing their drug use and advising followers on steroid usage.
“Regrettably, the level of medical knowledge and judgment varies significantly among these influencers,” states Piatkowski.
Influencers’ perceptions of health risks differ greatly, he observes. While some acknowledge the dangers of steroid use, asserting that risks can be managed sensibly, others are more reckless, promoting drugs like trenbolone, which is typically used to prevent muscle wastage in livestock, branding themselves as “Trenfluencers.”
Millions may question whether these substances are actually safe, or if influencers are leading them into perilous situations. What is the truth regarding the dangers associated with steroids? Is there a safer way to use them?
Piatkowski notes that research on the long-term health consequences of steroids is sparse. This is largely due to the mismatch between doses and usage patterns studied by researchers and those employed by actual users. He and his colleagues seek to bridge this gap by collaborating closely with steroid users to create more relevant and realistic studies.
However, this mismatch has already led to some influencers losing faith in mainstream scientific and medical perspectives, prompting users to seek advice from fitness and bodybuilding forums instead. These social media channels have become a major contributor to both the support network and the marketplace in the surge of steroid usage.
Users now have quick access to a range of substances that can be obtained illicitly. This includes oral anabolic steroids known as SARMs (selective androgen receptor modulators) and synthetic human growth hormone, naturally produced by the pituitary gland during adolescence. Collectively, they improve physique and performance, but their mechanisms can vary significantly.
One of the most prevalent substances is anabolic steroids, potent synthetic derivatives of testosterone. A 2022 study estimated that around half a million men and boys in the UK used them for non-medical purposes in the previous year.
Understanding Steroids
To determine whether steroids are safe, one must first grasp their effects on the body. Anabolic androgen steroids work by interacting with hormonal receptors that promote male sexual traits, particularly in muscle and bone tissues. “They aid in muscle growth and are vital for bone development; they guide boys through puberty and literally transform them into men,” explains Channa Jayasena from Imperial College London.
The desired result is evident: a bigger, stronger physique in a shorter timeframe. Medically, some of these substances are prescribed to treat conditions like muscle wasting associated with HIV. At lower doses, investigations suggest that steroids can be well tolerated. However, this is not a strategy commonly employed outside clinical settings.
Non-medical steroid use rarely mimics regulated clinical trials. Many users resort to “stacking” various drugs and alternate between cycles to allow bodily recovery, adopting practices like the “blast and cruise” regimen. Although these methods lack comprehensive scientific scrutiny, influencers often tout them as ways to minimize health risks or achieve effective muscle growth. This could explain why many users turn to influencers and online forums instead of healthcare professionals for advice.
The Risks of Unregulated Use
The temptation to test various drug combinations or follow cycling protocols stems from the belief that such strategies mitigate the adverse effects of anabolic steroids. The best-documented side effect is cardiovascular complications. Anabolic steroids are known to lower levels of high-density lipoproteins, or “good” cholesterol, while raising blood pressure and increasing low-density lipoproteins, known as “bad” cholesterol. This can thicken the heart muscle, potentially leading to cardiomyopathy—severe heart dysfunction and a lethal condition, as noted by Jayasena.
A Danish population study revealed that anabolic steroid users were three times more likely to die than other males during the study’s duration. “It’s akin to cocaine,” asserts Jayasena. Cardiovascular disease and cancer emerged as the most prevalent natural causes of death among these individuals.
Increased risk of heart disease and stroke is a well-known consequence of prolonged anabolic steroid use
3dmedisphere/shutterstock
Beyond cardiovascular matters, Jayasena highlights that the psychosocial implications of steroid use are significant and well-documented. The term “Roid Rage” encompasses various mental issues including aggression, mania, and mental illness—particularly among individuals consuming high doses. “When observing why steroid users have fatal outcomes, one notes three primary causes: cardiomyopathy, suicide, and aggression,” he notes, suggesting a possible correlation between steroid use and heightened tendencies toward criminal behavior.
This relationship remains contentious, as it’s challenging to differentiate the effects of steroid use from other contributing factors like recreational drug usage or pre-existing mental health issues. Nonetheless, it indicates that discontinuing steroid use may precipitate depression and suicidal thoughts. “The mind becomes lethargic,” explains Jayasena. “The recovery period can extend over months, sometimes even years.”
Research led by Jayasena revealed that nearly 30% of men who ceased steroid use experienced suicidal thoughts and major depression, possibly due to lingering steroid residues in brain areas responsible for emotional regulation. Additional studies indicate that steroids can impair kidney function and elevate cancer risks, although the data is less conclusive and heavily reliant on isolated medical case reports.
Several investigations have demonstrated that some of these health concerns might be reversible. For instance, the liver appears adept at self-repair and can manage lower clinical doses of certain steroids. Conversely, effects like high cholesterol and hypertension can be reversible post-steroid cessation; in contrast, others may require long-term or costly interventions to address, such as mood disorders and infertility.
The most severe repercussions of steroid use tend to be the hardest to treat. Structural alterations in the heart, along with research indicating lasting blood flow impairments to vital organs, is a concern that may linger long after users cease taking steroids.
Seeking “Safer” Steroids
Given the extensive and complex list of potential harms, many users experiment with steroid protocols aimed at risk reduction. This includes altering doses, timing, or combining them with other substances. However, there is a dearth of research examining the safety of these “protocols,” asserts Piatkowski.
One of Jayasena’s studies indicated that post-cycle therapy, where users take medications to restore natural testosterone production following steroid cycles, significantly lowered the risk of suicidal thoughts. Piatkowski’s research compares high-dose cycles and gradual tapering, identifying that those following a Blast Cruise approach reported fewer adverse health effects once they stopped using.
High-quality, controlled studies evaluating the effects of recreational steroid use are sparse, often characterized by small sample sizes or case reports that complicate the establishment of causal relationships. The evidence supporting specific protocols is also thin, particularly as patterns of steroid use evolve more rapidly than researchers can track.
Anabolic steroids are commonly injected into the subcutaneous fat layer located between the skin and muscle.
ole_cnx/istockphoto/getty images
“Further longitudinal and cohort studies are essential,” Piatkowski asserts. Such studies track individuals’ health and wellbeing over time, ultimately clarifying real risks and potentially providing strategies for risk mitigation. Nevertheless, in the absence of robust evidence, healthcare providers often struggle to offer guidance to steroid users.
Greg James, a clinician at Kratos Medical in Cardiff, UK, mentions that he provides private health and blood testing services. Some patients even inquire about combining steroids with GLP-1 drugs that suppress appetite, as well as other peptides that regulate hunger. “They ask me if these peptides are safe,” James notes. “And I respond that I cannot confirm their safety due to the lack of long-term data.”
Researchers like Piatkowski are beginning to directly engage with users in realistic settings, navigating the challenges posed by inadequate clinical data and rapidly changing user behaviors. Rather than viewing users as patients or outliers, this method considers them as valuable sources of real-life experience, contributing to the development of more relevant and realistic research.
A recent study conducted by Piatkowski and collaborators examined steroid samples from users, revealing that over 20% were contaminated with toxic substances such as lead, arsenic, and mercury. More than half were incorrectly administered, meaning users may have been taking far more potent agents intended for livestock use.
Another study involving interviews with diverse steroid users identified trenbolone as having the most negative consequences, particularly for psychological and social health. This suggests that focusing on trenbolone as a distinct harmful substance, along with targeted screening and intervention strategies, could be more effective for harm reduction compared to broad-ranging methods.
Fitness influencers are frequently regarded as authorities who provide guidance on anabolic steroid use to their followers.
Kritchanut Onmang/Alamy
This open and collaborative methodology in drug research mirrors approaches seen in other recreational drug strategies, like psychedelic research. By engaging with real users, insight can be gained not only into harm reduction techniques but also previously unrecognized medicinal applications.
They may also collaborate with influencers and users to promote safer behaviors, rather than outright condemning drug usage, Piatkowski emphasizes. “Enhancing knowledge within these communities and legalizing information is crucial. It’s an ongoing experimental endeavor. The more we stimulate this discussion, the more we can advance the field.”
Virgin Australia is contemplating a revision of its rules regarding lithium batteries following a fire incident on a flight from Sydney, which was reportedly triggered by a power bank found in passenger carry-on luggage.
Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) reports that the average traveler carries at least four rechargeable lithium battery devices, which may include smartphones, laptops, and portable power banks.
If you’re curious about the regulations and the reasons lithium-ion batteries are viewed as potential flight hazards, here’s a brief summary.
Can I bring a power bank on a plane?
Yes, but the rules vary, so you should check the airline’s restrictions before your flight.
Generally, according to CASA, laptops and cameras may be included in checked luggage as long as they are completely powered off.
However, spare batteries and power banks must be carried in carry-on baggage due to risks of short-circuiting, overheating, and fires during flight.
Lithium-ion batteries exceeding 160WH are not allowed under any circumstances unless they are used as medical aids.
Sign up: AU Breaking NewsEmail
Smart bags containing power banks or lithium-ion batteries are allowed, provided the battery can be removed and carried in the cabin before checking in.
Virgin Australia states that spare or loose batteries, including power banks, must solely be part of carry-on baggage and need to be kept in their original retail packaging; individual batteries should be placed in separate plastic bags, protective pouches, or have their terminals covered with tape.
Qantas advises that passengers with Apple AirPod cases and power banks containing spare or loose batteries should only store them in carry-on baggage.
The airline does not advise using or charging power banks on board for safety reasons.
Can I take a power bank on an overseas flight?
Numerous international airlines, including Thai Airways, Korean Airlines, Eva Airlines, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines, and Singapore Airlines and its budget arm Scoot, have imposed bans regarding their use on board.
If you plan to fly with an international airline, it is essential to verify their specific rules prior to traveling.
Generally, travelers are expected to keep power banks in their carry-on luggage. However, whether or not you can use them in-flight depends on the particular airline.
Is the risk of lithium battery fires significant on airplanes?
Not necessarily. Professor Neeraj Sharma, a battery specialist at the University of New South Wales, states that lithium-ion batteries contain 20 different components, some of which are liquid, making them more volatile than solid elements like electrodes and casings.
Applying pressure to a lithium-ion battery can spark “thermal runaway” (an uncontrollable temperature increase); however, battery explosions are exceedingly rare.
Sharma notes that airlines still recommend carrying batteries in baggage to minimize the risk.
He also mentions that power banks and other lithium-ion battery devices, which are less regulated than mobile phones and laptops (like electric scooters and steam devices), could pose more risks and may be made from inferior quality batteries.
Professor Amanda Ellis, head of the Department of Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering at the University of Melbourne, agrees that lithium battery fires are not particularly likely to happen on flights.
She explains that the pressure within an airplane cabin is supported by “multiple layers of casings,” preventing batteries from reaching a critical failure. However, enclosed environments can make fires particularly hazardous, especially since it’s not possible to escape the situation while in flight.
“Fires release highly toxic gases, especially in limited spaces that are far from ideal,” she remarks.
Ellis adds that lithium-ion battery fires can be challenging to extinguish, as lithium can ignite and ignite surrounding materials—high-energy substances that can sustain burning for extended periods.
“Using water to douse a lithium fire is not advisable, which could be the first instinct of someone on a plane,” she notes.
What causes lithium-ion batteries to ignite?
Lithium-ion batteries comprise ions suspended within an electrolyte solution. During charging and discharging, these ions travel back and forth across the two electrodes.
Ellis states that a common cause of battery fires is overcharging, which can lead to overheating. If a battery becomes excessively charged, it can crack, causing the highly flammable electrolyte to ignite when it contacts air.
More sophisticated lithium-battery-powered devices, like smartphones, typically include a built-in “trickle system” that prevents overcharging by incrementally adding current to the battery.
However, Ellis explains that cheaper power banks often lack this safety feature.
“Avoid charging a power bank overnight,” she advises. “Only charge it for as long as necessary. Monitor the power bank until the indicator light switches from red to green.”
Overall, Ellis reassures that if lithium batteries are used correctly and under suitable conditions, they are generally safe, and passengers need not be overly concerned while flying.
The threat of hurricanes in Florida is increasing, driven by anthropogenic climate change that warms our atmosphere and elevates sea surface temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico. Warmer conditions retain moisture, enhance hurricane intensity, and create more powerful storms, making Florida more susceptible to storm-related damage. During Hurricane Helen, extreme rainfall surged by 10%, with some regions in Florida receiving up to 26.95 inches of rainfall.
Jeremy Porter, a climate risk expert at the First Street Foundation, points out that soaring insurance costs reflect the significant effects of climate change in West Florida, where areas like Fort Myers Beach are grappling with recurring losses and expensive recovery efforts.
“In recent decades, we’ve been catching up with the reality of climate risks that weren’t adequately reflected in risk modeling. Now, as we reassess, premium costs are rising rapidly, impacting people’s household budgets,” Porter noted.
Due to a scarcity of home insurance options, residents are increasingly opting for coverage through Citizens Insurance Property Corp., a state-supported non-profit insurer in Florida.
Porter anticipates that by 2055, home insurance premiums in the Tampa Metro region could soar by 213% because of hurricane risks. Climate-related threats are similarly disrupting insurance markets in other states; for instance, Sacramento, California, may see a 137% rise due to heightened wildfire risks.
Porter also mentioned that declining home prices in Florida could influence insurance costs and accessibility. If property values fall below a certain threshold, insurers exposed to hurricane risks may view this as a warning sign, leading to increased scrutiny and potential hikes in premiums during the underwriting process.
Zillow data indicates that the value of homes in Fort Myers Beach has decreased by approximately $200,000 from pre-pandemic levels, with around 86% of last year’s sales reflecting this price drop.
Before Hurricane Ian, the average home value on Sanibel Island, a favored destination in Lee County, stood at nearly $1.3 million. Today, it has plummeted to $868,000, with 93% of homes having sold at reduced prices.
Joan Krempner, a part-time resident of Fort Myers Beach since 2016, stated that selling her home is not financially feasible after substantial rebuilding costs following Hurricane Ian. With few alternatives but to remain in Fort Myers Beach, Krempner expresses concern about the long-term implications of climate change on the community’s future.
“We must face that this is a long-term issue. The critical question is whether people want to keep investing in Fort Myers Beach,” Krempner remarked. “If there hasn’t been a hurricane in 30 years, the risk seems worthwhile for living in paradise. But if three major hurricanes strike within 18 months, doubt creeps in.”
Jacki Liszak, president and CEO of the Fort Myers Beach Chamber of Commerce, asserts that Fort Myers Beach remains an attractive place to live and visit, highlighting community efforts toward resilient architecture and the construction of homes above flood levels.
“Homes must be built strong and elevated,” Liszak emphasized. “This is beneficial. People are already here, and they’ll continue to come. They cherish this lifestyle—it’s truly a beautiful part of the world.”
A prominent AI Safety Group has warned that artificial intelligence firms are “fundamentally unprepared” for the consequences of developing systems with human-level cognitive abilities.
The Future of Life Institute (FLI) noted that its AI Safety Index scored a D in “Existential Safety Plans.”
Among the five reviewers of the FLI report, there was a focus on the pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI). However, none of the examined companies presented “a coherent, actionable plan” to ensure the systems remain safe and manageable.
AGI denotes a theoretical phase of AI evolution where a system can perform cognitive tasks at a level akin to humans. OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, emphasizes that AGI should aim to “benefit all of humanity.” Safety advocates caution that AGIs might pose existential risks by eluding human oversight and triggering disastrous scenarios.
The FLI report indicated: “The industry is fundamentally unprepared for its own aspirations. While companies claim they will achieve AGI within a decade, their existential safety plans score no higher than a D.”
The index assesses seven AI developers—Google Deepmind, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, Xai, Zhipu AI, and Deepseek—across six categories, including “current harm” and “existential safety.”
Humanity received the top overall safety grade of C+, followed by OpenAI with a C-, and Google DeepMind with a D.
FLI is a nonprofit based in the US advocating for the safer development of advanced technologies, receiving “unconditional” donations from crypto entrepreneur Vitalik Buterin.
SaferAI, another nonprofit focused on safety; also released a report on Thursday. They raised alarms about advanced AI companies exhibiting “weak to very weak risk management practices,” deeming current strategies “unacceptable.”
FLI’s safety evaluations were conducted by a panel of AI experts, including UK computer scientist Stuart Russell and Sneha Revanur, founder of the AI Regulation Campaign Group.
Max Tegmark, co-founder of FLI and professor at MIT, remarked that it was “quite severe” to expect leading AI firms to create ultra-intelligent systems without disclosing plans to mitigate potential outcomes.
He stated:
Tegmark mentioned that the technology is advancing rapidly, countering previous beliefs that experts would need decades to tackle AGI challenges. “Now, companies themselves assert it’s just a few years away,” he stated.
He pointed out that advancements in AI capabilities have consistently outperformed previous generations. Since the Global AI Summit in Paris in February, new models like Xai’s Grok 4, Google’s Gemini 2.5, and its video generator Veo3 have demonstrated significant improvements over their predecessors.
A spokesperson for Google DeepMind asserted that the report overlooks “the entirety of Google DeepMind’s AI safety initiatives,” adding, “Our comprehensive approach to safety and security far exceeds what’s captured in the report.”
OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, Xai, Zhipu AI, and Deepseek have also been contacted for their feedback.
New research published on Monday indicates that the number of structures in the United States vulnerable to flooding may be greater than previously estimated.
A study, published in the Journal’s Future of Earth, revealed that 43% of North Carolina’s flooded buildings from 1996 to 2020 are outside the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Special Flood Hazard Areas, which FEMA designates as having a 1% chance of flooding in any given year.
Experts and the study’s authors believe these findings may assist more communities in understanding their flood risks and insurance needs. As companies pull back from increasing insurance premiums and insuring homes in certain regions due to more frequent severe weather, obtaining flood insurance is becoming increasingly challenging, leaving property owners more exposed.
According to NBC News, experts stated that having access to reliable data sources could facilitate the creation of nationwide databases like the one outlined in the study.
FEMA’s maps serve as the main reference for identifying flood-prone zones and structures requiring insurance coverage. However, experts argue that this system is outdated and lacks resolution. A 100-year floodplain projection doesn’t fully encompass the areas that could be at risk for flooding, and the authors noted that climate change has compromised the reliability of previously authoritative weather and climate forecasts.
This study enabled researchers to pinpoint specific structures that have experienced multiple flooding incidents by utilizing address-level data. This information could inform property owners on whether to obtain flood insurance, even if they fall outside FEMA’s designated flood hazard zones. In the United States, FEMA reports that 99% of counties have experienced flooding, yet only 4% of homeowners hold flood insurance at least once.
“Detailed information about previously flooded areas can empower individuals to make informed decisions,” expressed Helena Margaret Garcia, the lead author of the study and a doctoral candidate at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.
FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program did not respond to requests for comments.
FEMA is currently working on revamping its flood mapping system through the Future of Flood Risk Data initiative, aimed at employing more efficient, accurate, and consistent technology to assess the country’s flood risks comprehensively.
Water markers in Orocoke, North Carolina homes illustrate the increasing severity of flooding between hurricanes over time. Courtesy of Helena Garcia
As global temperatures rise, more intense rainfall events are becoming common since warmer air can hold more moisture. Climate change has also contributed to rising sea levels, increasing vulnerability to flooding even in coastal and some inland areas. Hurricane Helen, the third deadliest hurricane of modern times, inflicted substantial flooding in North Carolina’s mountainous regions. Damage from the storm exceeded a total of $78 billion, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The recent severe rainfall has caused flash floods across many U.S. towns over the last two weeks, most recently impacting towns in New Jersey and New York City. In North Carolina alone, six deaths have been reported, while over 100 fatalities have occurred in Texas. Flash floods have historically accounted for the highest number of storm-related deaths in the U.S., averaging 125 deaths per year over recent decades, according to the National Weather Service.
A North Carolina climate scientist noted that the warm seawater feeding the storm could have been a contributing factor to last week’s Tropical Storm Chantal, which set rainfall and river level records in the state.
With the impacts of climate change, having access to up-to-date maps is essential, experts argue.
In their study, researchers mapped 78 flood events using data from 1996 to 2020 from the National Flood Insurance Program, which allows property owners to purchase insurance for potential flood-related losses. They also incorporated emergency service requests and volunteer-based geographic information obtained from social media, creating what they termed the “first of its kind” database. This historical flood data is often inaccessible to the public, which can hinder homeowners’ awareness of prior flood incidents affecting their properties.
Garcia stated that researchers plan to apply the same methodology from their study to create similar historical maps in various regions across the country, identifying areas previously overlooked concerning flood risk.
The research indicated that out of 90,000 structures, only 20,000 experienced flooding, highlighting a significant number that did not file NFIP claims. The study’s authors are now focused on quantifying the human impact, examining outcomes such as healthcare disruptions resulting from floods and the scale of evacuations caused by repeated flooding, as Garcia explained.
On July 7th, Eastgate Mall’s parking lot in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, was inundated following a tropical storm. Courtesy of Antonia Sebastian/Helena Garcia
Antonia Sebastian, an assistant professor in the Department of Geology at UNC-Chapel Hill, noted that the study aspires to establish a “comprehensive record of past floods” by gathering data on relatively minor flood events that impact homeowners yet do not receive widespread media attention.
“Areas that have previously flooded are likely to flood again; it’s only a matter of time,” Sebastian remarked. “These sites are inherently dangerous.”
Chad Belginis, executive director of the Flood Plains Association who was not involved in the study, stated that FEMA’s maps are intended to implement the NFIP by utilizing 100-year flood plains to delineate zones for flood insurance coverage. He emphasized that analyzing historical flood research highlights the necessity for flood insurance in areas beyond the mapped FEMA flood hazard zones.
“FEMA’s flood map serves as a starting point, not an endpoint,” Berginnis clarified. “The maps present one kind of flood risk, but to fully grasp flood risk, it is crucial to seek out historical flood data.”
He mentioned that the database models illustrated in the study could be adopted in various other regions. A community manager indicated that identifying past flood sites could enhance community awareness regarding flood risks.
“When we consider the history of floods, [like those along the Guadalupe River], it emphasizes the dangers that have persisted over time,” they reflected. “I truly believe that these areas should be acknowledged as perilous, yet awareness of the actual flooding risks is often lacking.”
June Choi, a doctoral student in Earth Systems Science at Stanford University and not involved in the study, noted that the finding regarding many flooded buildings existing outside FEMA-designated risky areas likely applies to all states. She highlighted that while new databases might have limitations regarding changing building densities over time, the application of historical records and address-specific data still provides valuable insights for assessing future flood risks.
Demis Hassabis, the CEO of Google DeepMind and a Nobel Prize Winner for his work in developing the AlphafoldAI algorithm that predicts protein structures, appeared on 60 Minutes in April. He asserted that, with the assistance of AI like Alphafold, we might reach the end of all diseases within the next decade.
This assertion is met with skepticism by those involved in drug development and disease treatment. For instance, Derek Lowe, an experienced drug chemist, reacted to Hassabis’ remarks by stating, “I want to quietly stare out the window and express words I don’t understand.” It’s not necessary to be an expert to see the hyperbole; the notion of entirely eliminating diseases in a decade is far-fetched.
Some speculate that Hassabis’ claim is yet another instance of tech leaders overstating their achievements to attract investors. Isn’t this reminiscent of Elon Musk’s outrageous predictions about Mars settlements or Sam Altman’s assertions regarding the impending arrival of artificial general intelligence (AGI)? While this cynical perspective has some merit, such experts may downplay the underlying complexities.
It seems like authorities occasionally make bold statements outside their expertise (consider Stephen Hawking on AI, aliens, and space travel). However, Hassabis appears to recognize his boundaries, as his Nobel comments highlight the potential for new drug development stemming from Alphafold’s predictions, which generated buzz about groundbreaking discoveries.
Similarly, another 2024 Nobel laureate, Jeffrey Hinton, previously an AI advisor at Google, emphasized that large-scale language models (LLMs) are similar to human learning. So, don’t worry about crying protests from cognitive scientists—or in some instances, AI too much.
These examples suggest that, oddly, some AI experts may mirror their creations—producing remarkable outcomes while acknowledging their limitations.
Another case is Daniel Kokotajiro, a researcher who departed from OpenAI over concerns regarding AGI and is now the executive director of the AI Futures project in California. He stated, “We’ve caught AIs lying, and I’m sure they knew what they were saying was wrong.” His knowledge, intentions, and anthropomorphic language reveal that Kokotajiro may be overlooking the true nature of LLMs.
The danger of assuming these experts are always right is highlighted by Hinton’s 2016 comment suggesting that, due to AI, “We should stop training radiologists now.” Fortunately, radiology experts dismissed this claim; there are doubts about a connection between his comments and growing concerns among medical students regarding the future of radiology jobs. Hinton has since revised that statement—but imagine the impact it could have had if he had already received a Nobel. The same applies to Hassabis’ comments about illnesses. The notion that AI could handle everything fosters overconfidence when it requires a far more nuanced, scientifically and politically-informed approach.
These “expert” predictions often go unchallenged in the media. I can personally attest that even some intelligent scientists are persuaded by them. Many governmental leaders seem to have bought into the hype generated by high-tech CEOs and Silicon Valley titans. We need to start scrutinizing their proclamations with the same skepticism we apply to the statements made by LLMs.
Philip Ball is a science writer based in London. His latest book is How Life Works.
Exposure to light at night significantly raises the risk of heart disease, according to extensive research.
Various environmental and behavioral signals synchronize the body’s circadian rhythms, the internal clocks that manage physiological functions. However, contemporary lifestyles often disrupt these biological mechanisms, heightening sensitivity to health issues.
Previous studies utilizing satellite data have indicated associations between residents of brightly lit urban areas and heart disease, focusing solely on outdoor light at night. Daniel Windred, from Flinders University in Adelaide, and his team sought to determine if overall light exposure impacts cardiovascular health.
They monitored approximately 89,000 individuals without pre-existing cardiovascular conditions, equipping them with light sensors for a week between 2013 and 2016. “This represents the largest research effort on personal light exposure patterns affecting cardiovascular health to date.”
The sensors captured both natural and artificial light sources, including emissions from mobile phones. Over the eight-year period, participants who experienced the brightest nights showed a 23-56% increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease compared to those exposed to darker nights.
For example, individuals in the highest light exposure category included those who activated overhead lights for an hour from midnight to 6 AM. “This scenario places them within the 90th to 100th percentiles of nighttime light exposure,” Windred noted. He emphasized that the body continues to react to artificial light even after it is turned off, and short exposures can disrupt circadian rhythms.
Researchers accounted for factors such as gender, age, smoking habits, and shift work. They also demonstrated that the connection between light exposure and heart disease risk remained constant, regardless of sleep duration, sleep efficiency, or genetic predisposition.
Interestingly, although women generally have a lower incidence of heart disease at the same age as men, exposure to bright nighttime light can neutralize this protective effect due to estrogen. Evidence suggests that women experience more significant melatonin suppression in response to bright light, making their circadian systems more sensitive compared to men.
Disruption of circadian rhythms can compromise glucose tolerance, elevating the risk for type 2 diabetes, which is a risk factor for heart disease. Such disruption also influences blood pressure and can increase the risk for abnormal cardiac rhythms due to conflicting signals between the brain and heart.
“The significance of these findings must not be understated,” stated Martin Young from the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “As a 24/7 society increasingly disrupts our circadian systems, this study underscores the notable health risks linked to such exposure.”
Windred suggests that individuals strive to maintain a darker nighttime environment. “Optimize your sleep schedule to ensure darkness during bedtime. If you awaken during the night, utilize dim lighting and avoid bright overhead lights.”
The CEO of Amazon informed the company’s office workers that opportunities in artificial intelligence will be available in the upcoming years.
Andrew Jassy advised his team that AI agents—tools designed to perform tasks autonomously—will lead to a reduction in workforce in specific AI areas, including chatbots.
“As we integrate more generative AI and agents, our work dynamics will transform,” he mentioned in a note to the team. “There will be fewer individuals in some existing roles, while others will shift to different types of work.
“It’s hard to predict the exact trajectory of this change, but we anticipate a decrease in our overall workforce in the coming years.”
Amazon currently employs 1.5 million individuals globally, with around 350,000 in corporate positions such as software engineering and marketing.
Recently, the CEO of BT, a UK telecommunications firm, stated that advancements in AI might lead to deeper job cuts in their company. Conversely, Dario Amodei, CEO of AI research firm Anthropic, noted that AI could potentially eliminate half of all entry-level office jobs.
Jassy projected that billions of AI agents will become integral to the everyday operations of companies and individuals alike soon.
“These AI agents will be present in virtually every company and industry. From shopping to handling daily tasks, many of these agents will assist in various aspects of life outside of work. Although not all of these agents have been developed yet, there is no doubt about their future impact.”
Jassy concluded his message by urging employees to engage with AI, emphasizing the importance of self-education and participating in training programs.
“Those who adapt to this change and familiarize themselves with AI—by developing and enhancing AI capabilities internally and delivering them to our customers—will play a crucial role in redefining the company,” he asserted.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an influential international policy body, estimates that this technology could lead to job losses among skilled white-collar professionals in fields like law, medicine, and finance. According to the International Monetary Fund, 60% of jobs in advanced economies such as the US and the UK could be vulnerable to AI, with half at risk of being adversely affected.
On the other hand, the Tony Blair Institute advocates for broader AI adoption across public and private sectors, suggesting that while the private sector could see job reductions of up to 3 million in the UK, net losses will be counterbalanced by the creation of new positions thanks to technological advancements.
Rockets can transport cooling aerosols to high altitudes
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
Reusable rockets designed to deliver sun-reflecting aerosols into the upper stratosphere could help cool the planet. However, this fleet of climate-modifying rockets presents its own challenges.
The increase in global temperatures has led to a surge in research on solar geoengineering, a controversial method aimed at cooling the Earth by reflecting sunlight. The most recognized technique, known as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), entails continuously releasing reflective particles, such as sulfur dioxide, into the stratosphere.
Typically, researchers believe that aerosols will be released from cargo aircraft flying at around 20 km high. Climate models suggest that this could offset warming caused by rising greenhouse gas levels. Nonetheless, it also presents numerous other climate risks, some of which are unknown.
One significant concern is that the aerosols absorb sunlight, warming the stratosphere itself, even while surface temperatures cool. Because of wind patterns, aerosols tend to cluster in the tropical stratosphere, resulting in more warming than in other areas of the atmosphere. This can disrupt jet streams and circulation patterns that influence global weather.
Aerosols may also hasten ozone depletion caused by chlorine, potentially postponing the recovery of ozone holes over Antarctica by as much as 50 years.
Pengfei Yu from Jinan University in China and his team explored whether injecting aerosols at much greater heights—50 kilometers in the upper stratosphere—would change these dynamics. They discovered that high-altitude injections could yield greater cooling benefits than lower altitude methods, as aerosols persist longer, particularly at the poles. This additional height also prevents the aerosols from warming the lower stratosphere until they reach the poles, avoiding the harmful heating in the tropical stratosphere.
Finally, researchers found that these aerosols interact with another chemical that depletes ozone, which results in only a five-year delay in ozone recovery. “We weren’t aware that [injecting at] 50 kilometers offered such a different perspective,” says Yu.
Since planes cannot reach nearly 50 km, researchers propose using rockets. They estimate that deploying 80 reusable, hydrogen-powered rockets every other day could inject between 3 million and 8 million tonnes of aerosols annually, which they say falls within current technological capabilities.
While this scenario may be theoretically feasible, it is likely to be significantly more complex than traditional SAI approaches, according to Douglas McMartin at Cornell University in New York. Some advantages, such as preventing warming in the tropical stratosphere, can be more easily achieved by focusing on higher latitudes instead of high altitudes.
“It may rise higher in the atmosphere for increased efficiency, but the costs are astronomical in comparison,” he states.
Moreover, the high-altitude method does not fully mitigate many risks associated with solar geoengineering, including the rapid temperature increase that could follow if injection ceases. “What happens if the rockets fail on the ground?” Yu questions. “That’s a legitimate concern.”
After a year of mutual admiration and affection, Elon Musk and Donald Trump dramatically severed their political ties this week. This notable split featured the world’s wealthiest individual accusing the President of the United States of having connections with notorious sex offenders. Trump remarked that Musk had “lost his heart.”
The fallout from their disagreement poses real threats, with both Musk and Trump publicly shaming each other on their respective social platforms. Trump hinted that all of Musk’s government contracts and subsidies could be scrapped – labeling it “The Best Way to Save Money,” a move that could have disastrous implications not just for tech billionaires, but also for federal agencies relying on them. In response, Musk announced that NASA would start withdrawing the SpaceX Dragon Spacecraft from transport missions, though he later backtracked on this decision.
While their feud plays out like a sensational reality show, the confrontation between Trump and Musk highlights the dangers of entrusting vital public services to private companies led by unpredictable billionaires. It showcases how something once seen as a proud national endeavor, like space travel, can become jeopardized by the emotional whims of a single individual.
The previously cordial relationship sparked months of concerns about potential corruption and calls for investigations into how Tesla’s CEO could leverage his government ties for personal gain. This division illustrates the hazards of Musk’s deep entanglements with the government, where his services could become collateral damage in personal conflicts. Millions of dollars hang in the balance as their rivalry unfolds.
The chaotic manner in which this dispute is transpiring reminds us of the unpredictability of their actions. Musk’s SpaceX spacecraft and its commitments, if disrupted, could prevent the United States from promptly reaching the International Space Station.
“In response to the President’s statement about canceling my government contract, @Spacex will soon begin to abolish the Dragon Spacecraft,” Musk tweeted unexpectedly on Thursday.
“Good advice. Ok, we won’t abolish the Dragon,” Musk replied the next day, responding to an anonymous user with approximately 5,000 followers who suggested “we’ll calm down for a few days and take a step back.”
Had the Musk-Trump feud disrupted governmental operations or used them as political leverage, it wouldn’t have been unforeseen. Since Musk declined in 2023 to allow Ukraine to utilize Starlink in Crimea, the government has faced the harsher reality of relying on Musk’s global infrastructure, a precarious position in case of an unexpected attack on Russian forces. Musk’s assertion that he could disable Starlink almost led to a diplomatic incident earlier this year. Meanwhile, European authorities have recently rushed to seek alternatives to Starlink amid concerns over Musk’s erratic behavior.
Musk has positioned himself as an unpredictable global power broker, yet the U.S. continues to grant him contracts, further entrenching his corporate influence. Specifically, space operations have become synonymous with Musk.
Since winning its first NASA contract in 2006, SpaceX has been awarded approximately $15 billion in government contracts, tasked with transporting astronauts and cargo into orbit. NASA has also contracted SpaceX for a mission to explore one of Saturn’s moons with a planned crewed endeavor. Last year, SpaceX was called upon to rescue two astronauts stranded on the ISS.
The government’s dependence on Musk extends beyond NASA. The Department of Defense maintains extensive contracts with Musk for launching intelligence satellites through SpaceX. The company has also emerged as the front runner in the Trump administration’s initiative to establish a “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, a priority for U.S. defense. Musk’s Starlink communications system has become integral to government operations, reaching the White House this year.
Musk remains a powerful figure in the market and among investors, as illustrated by the nearly 14% drop in Tesla’s share price during his fallout with Trump. Musk has indicated readiness to incur losses for his principles, and his immense wealth provides a buffer against major downturns in his business. The decline in Tesla’s shares on Thursday erased about $34 billion from his net worth in a single day, yet he remains the world’s richest person, with a margin exceeding $90 billion.
The significant reliance on Musk and the privatization of government functions have long drawn scrutiny from ethical watchdogs and industry specialists, but the current climate seems particularly precarious now that Musk has hinted at holding certain services hostage. This situation also highlights the consequences of the privatization initiatives that Musk supported during his tenure in the Trump administration. While Musk has firmly criticized bureaucracy, courts, and regulators as barriers to progress, they also serve as safeguards against the type of personal power and instability displayed by both him and Trump amid their escalating conflict.
Prior to the deployment of the omnipotent system, AI companies are encouraged to replicate the safety assessments that formed the basis of Robert Oppenheimer’s initial nuclear test.
Max Tegmark, a prominent advocate for AI safety, conducted analyses akin to those performed by American physicist Arthur Compton before the Trinity test, indicating a 90% likelihood that advanced AI could present an existential threat.
The US government went ahead with Trinity in 1945, after providing assurances that there was minimal risk of the atomic bomb igniting the atmosphere and endangering humanity.
In a paper published by Tegmark and three students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the “Compton constant” is suggested for calculation. This is articulated as the likelihood that omnipotent AI could evade human control. Compton mentioned in a 1959 interview with American author Pearlback that he approved the test after evaluating the odds for uncontrollable reactions to be “slightly less” than one in three million.
Tegmark asserted that AI companies must diligently assess whether artificial superintelligence (ASI)—the theoretical system that surpasses human intelligence in all dimensions—can remain under human governance.
“Firms developing superintelligence ought to compute the Compton constant, which indicates the chances of losing control,” he stated. “Merely expressing a sense of confidence is not sufficient. They need to quantify the probability.”
Tegmark believes that achieving a consensus on the Compton constant, calculated by multiple firms, could create a “political will” to establish a global regulatory framework for AI safety.
A professor of physics at MIT and an AI researcher, Tegmark is also a co-founder of The Future of Life Institute, a nonprofit advocating for the secure advancement of AI. The organization released an open letter in 2023 calling for a pause in the development of powerful ASI, garnering over 33,000 signatures, including notable figures such as Elon Musk and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak.
This letter emerged several months post the release of ChatGPT, marking the dawn of a new era in AI development. It cautioned that AI laboratories are ensnared in “uncontrolled races” to deploy “ever more powerful digital minds.”
Tegmark discussed these issues with the Guardian alongside a group of AI experts, including tech industry leaders, representatives from state-supported safety organizations, and academics.
The Singapore consensus, outlined in the Global AI Safety Research Priority Report, was crafted by distinguished computer scientist Joshua Bengio and Tegmark, with contributions from leading AI firms like OpenAI and Google DeepMind. Three broad research priority areas for AI safety have been established: developing methods to evaluate the impacts of existing and future AI systems, clarifying AI functionality and designing systems to meet those objectives, and managing and controlling system behavior.
Referring to the report, Tegmark noted that discussions surrounding safe AI development have regained momentum following remarks by US Vice President JD Vance, asserting that the future of AI will not be won through mere hand-raising and safety debates.
An illustrative instance of Elderspeak: Cindy Smith was spending time with her father in his assisted living apartment located in Roseville, California.
“He just shot her a look from beneath his bushy brows and asked, ‘What are we, married?'” she recounted.
Her father, 92 years old, was a former county planner and a World War II veteran. Although macular degeneration affected his eyesight and he navigated with caution, his cognitive faculties remained sharp.
“He usually isn’t very placid with others,” Smith noted. “But he felt he was an adult, and he often wasn’t treated as such.”
Most people intuitively grasp what “Elderspeak” entails. “What resembles baby talk is often directed toward the elderly,” stated Clarissa Shaw, a dementia care researcher and co-author affiliated with the University of Iowa College of Nursing. Recent Articles document its prevalence in research.
“It emerges from ageist assumptions of fragility, incapability, and reliance.”
This aspect may also involve inappropriate affection. “Elderspeak behaves like a superior, incorporating terms like ‘honey,’ ‘dearie,’ and ‘sweetie’ to dulcet the communication,” remarked Kristine Williams, a nurse gerontologist from the University of Kansas’s Faculty of Nursing and another co-author.
“We hold negative stereotypes about older individuals, prompting changes in our speech.”
Alternatively, caregivers might resort to using various pronouns. Are you ready for a bath? In this case, “they don’t act as individuals,” Dr. Williams explained. “I certainly hope I’m not bathing with you.”
Occasionally, Elderspeakers utilize loud, brief sentences or simple words delivered slowly. They may also employ an exaggerated singing tone more fitting for children, using terms like “toilet” or “jammies.”
With the so-called tag question – It’s lunchtime now, right? – “You’re posing questions but not allowing them to answer,” Dr. Williams clarified. “You’re telling them how to respond.”
Research in nursing homes highlights how prevalent such speech patterns are. This was evident when Dr. Williams, Dr. Shaw, and their team evaluated video recordings of 80 engagements between staff and dementia patients, finding that 84% involved some variant of Elderspeak.
“Most Elderspeak is well-meaning. People genuinely aim to assist,” Dr. Williams noted. “They fail to recognize the negative implications inherent in it.”
For instance, research among dementia patients in nursing homes has identified a correlation between exposure to Elderspeak and behaviors collectively referred to as resistance to care. Research indicates.
“Individuals might turn away, cry, or refuse,” Dr. Williams elucidated. “They could close their mouths during feeding attempts.” Some may even push caregivers away or become aggressive.
She and her team created a training initiative called Chat (Change Talk), a three-hour session that incorporates videos of communication between staff and patients, aiming to mitigate the use of Elderspeak.
The initiative proved effective. Prior to the training, encounters in 13 nursing homes located in Kansas and Missouri revealed that roughly 35% of staff interactions involved Elderspeak. This figure has now dropped to around 20%.
Simultaneously, resistance behaviors constituted nearly 36% of interaction time. Post-training, this percentage decreased to approximately 20%.
Additionally, a study carried out at Midwest Hospital found the same decline in resistance behaviors among dementia patients. The findings indicated.
Furthermore, the implementation of chat training in nursing homes was linked to a reduction in antipsychotic medication usage. While the results did not achieve statistical significance, they were deemed “clinically significant” by the researchers due to the small sample sizes involved.
“Many of these medications carry a black box warning from the FDA,” Dr. Williams mentioned. “Their use in frail elderly populations can be perilous due to potential side effects.”
Currently, Dr. Williams, Dr. Shaw, and their colleagues have streamlined the chat training for online implementation. They are assessing its effectiveness across around 200 nursing homes nationwide.
Even without a structured program, individuals and organizations can combat Elderspeak. Kathleen Carmody, the owner of Senior Matters Home Care and Consulting in Columbus, Ohio, suggests that when addressing clients, one should use titles like Mr. or Mrs., unless instructed otherwise.
However, in long-term care settings, families and residents may express concerns that altering staff communication could lead to resentment.
A few years ago, Carol Fahe dealt with a mother who was vision-impaired at an assisted living facility near Cleveland, becoming increasingly dependent in her 80s.
She described staff members who called her mother “sweetie” and “honey,” hovering over her while tying her hair in pigtails, likening the treatment to how toddlers are treated, said Fahe, 72, a psychologist from Kaneohe, Hawaii.
She recognized the aides meant well, but “there’s a misleading notion associated with that,” she reflected. “It doesn’t feel good for anyone. It’s isolating.”
Fahe contemplated addressing her concerns with the aide but hesitated, fearing retaliation. Ultimately, she moved her mother to a different facility for various reasons.
However, opposing Elderspeak doesn’t need to be confrontational, Dr. Shaw emphasized. Residents, patients, and individuals encountering Elderspeak elsewhere can respectfully express their preferences regarding how they wish to be addressed and what names they prefer, which is often applicable beyond healthcare environments.
Cultural variances also play a significant role. Felipe Agudero, a health communication educator at Boston University, pointed out that in specific contexts, endearing terms or phrases “aren’t rooted in underestimating someone’s intellect. They represent affection.”
Having moved from Colombia, he noted that his 80-year-old mother does not take offense when a physician or healthcare staff asks her to “Tómesela pastilita” (take this little pill) or “Muévanlas manitas” (move your little hands).
Such expressions are customary and “she feels as though she’s conversing with someone who cares,” Dr. Agudero conveyed.
“Arrive at a place of negotiation,” he advised. “There’s no need for confrontation. Patients have every right to state, ‘I prefer not to be spoken to in that manner.’ “
In response, professionals should “acknowledge that the recipient may not share the same cultural background,” he noted, adding, “This is how I communicate, but I can adapt.”
Lisa Graeme, 65, a retired writer from Alvada, Colorado, recently confronted Elderspeak when she enrolled in Medicare drug coverage.
She recalled receiving nearly daily calls from mail-order pharmacies, following their failure to meet her prescription needs.
These “overly sweet” callers seemed to follow a script, addressing her as “Mr. Graeme,” as if they were administering medication.
Frustrated by their assumptions and their probing questions about her medication adherence, Ms. Graeme informed them that she had sufficient stock, thanks. She organizes her own refills.
“I asked them to cease calling,” she recounted. “And they did.”
On page 36 of the official national strategy document, signed by the president, 10 federal agencies are involved.
This is not a governmental policy related to tariffs or border control. It is part of President Trump’s Master Plan to Eradicate Paper Straws, leading us back to plastic.
The document states, “My administration is dedicated to clarifying the confusion that many citizens face when using paper straws.”
Critics argue this is a culture war shot, whether targeting paper straws, wind turbines, or low-flow showerheads, reflecting Trump’s erratic administration policies.
However, there’s an unexpected twist. This document complicates a larger public health issue with its intent to deregulate.
Focusing on paper straws, it dedicates eight pages to discussing health and environmental risks, particularly highlighting PFA—a group of synthetic chemicals linked to severe health problems—found in tap water nationwide.
Last year, the Biden administration implemented strict federal PFA standards, known as “forever chemicals,” which resist environmental breakdown. Yet, the industry and utility sectors challenged this, calling it “impossible” and “absurd”; they urged Trump to reverse these regulations.
It remains unclear if EPA leader Lee Zeldin will enforce these measures. A court decision is pending about whether to continue adhering to regulations ahead of a May 12 deadline.
“Will Zeldin reverse the PFAS drinking water standards given this anti-PFA rhetoric from the White House?” asked Matthew Tehada, head of environmental health policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If there’s concern about straw-related PFA, can Zeldin ignore drinking water issues?”
Under Zeldin’s leadership, the agency pushes for deregulation, aiming to eliminate numerous environmental rules limiting toxic pollution. He also has strong ties as a lobbyist and lawyer against environmental laws.
During a news briefing, Zeldin commented that the science surrounding PFA “is still under debate.”
“We have more questions regarding PFA, and it’s crucial to continue research,” he stated, claiming regulations should rely more on “factual evidence rather than assumptions.”
Yet, Trump’s strategy document directly addresses chemical concerns.
“For decades, scientists and regulators have expressed concern over PFAS chemicals,” the White House document notes. “PFA poses risks to human health and is associated with reproductive harm, developmental delays in children, cancer, hormonal disturbances, obesity, and other serious health issues.”
This week, the White House reiterated these warnings. “Paper straws contain harmful PFAS chemicals that infiltrate our water supply,” as stated by the administration in an Earth Day announcement on Monday.
Another variable is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, who participated in a forum on Wednesday discussing the health and environmental impacts of plastics, including PFA, which he advocates removing from the food system. “We have substantial justification for eliminating this entire chemical category from our food due to its health risks,” he stated.
Both the White House and the EPA affirmed their unified approach to PFA.
“President Trump and Zeldin are collaboratively working to eliminate harmful toxins from our environment,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers declared. “The Trump administration, including Zeldin, acknowledges that PFA is detrimental to human health. More research on PFA’s risks is essential for improving the health of Americans.”
EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou refrained from commenting on the potential rollback of PFAS drinking water standards but highlighted Zeldin’s significant experience with PFA issues.
Before joining the Trump administration, Zeldin served four terms as a lawmaker in Long Island and was among 23 House Republicans who supported the PFAS Act in 2020—a comprehensive bill to regulate chemicals in drinking water and hold polluters accountable.
“He stands as a strong advocate for protecting the drinking water of Long Islanders and all Americans,” Vaselio remarked.
Zeldin is correct that further investigation is crucial to understand the health effects of PFA exposure. However, evidence increasingly indicates harm from these chemicals, particularly the most studied types. Trump’s White House strategy includes references supporting this evidence.
“The EPA examined current peer-reviewed scientific studies and concluded that PFA exposure is linked to various health risks,” the document states.
This comprises lower birth rates, hypertension in pregnant women, low birth weight, early onset of puberty, behavioral changes in children, weakened immune response, and heightened cholesterol levels, according to the White House.
Plastic also contains harmful chemicals. Microplastics pervade our ecosystems and pose health risks. Critics emphasize the fossil fuel industry’s role in promoting plastics through production.
Nonetheless, Linda Billumbaum, a toxicologist and former director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who has long warned about PFAs, acknowledged some points from the White House document. “Their claims regarding these adverse effects are well-founded,” she expressed.
However, if the Trump administration is genuinely concerned about PFA’s health impacts, they should also address the presence of these chemicals in our surroundings, including food packaging and drinking water. “Instead, they focus efforts on rallying support around straws,” she remarked.
The controversy over plastic straws began around the mid-2010s, as they became scapegoated for the plastic waste crisis. Numerous cities and retailers have instituted bans on plastic straws, while some states enacted restrictions. (Disability rights organizations have raised concerns about these bans, citing the need for straws for safe drinking.)
Alternatives to plastic include stainless steel or glass straws and lids with spouts. However, paper straws quickly gained traction as replacements, only to be criticized for collapsing when used.
During this period, scientists also began finding PFA on various paper and plant-based straws, raising alarms about exposure to harmful chemicals and their potential to contaminate water supplies.
The president has labeled Biden-era measures a “paper straw mandate,” although these initiatives did not specifically enforce a shift to paper straws.
His animosity toward paper straws dates back years, notably during the 2020 campaign, where he offered packs of 10 branded plastic straws for $15.
In his comprehensive strategy, Trump instructs federal agencies to “be innovative and utilize all available policy tools to eliminate the use of paper straws nationwide.” Moreover, “taxpayer dollars should never be squandered, so federal contracts and grants should not support paper straws or entities that prohibit plastic straws.”
Christine Figgener, a Marine Conservation Biologist (known for a viral video showing a plastic straw being removed from a turtle’s nostril), counters the argument that switching to paper is a solution, suggesting a less complex answer: avoid using straws altogether.
She criticizes straws as “a symbol of unnecessary convenience in society.” “Why is America so fixated on straws? Most people do not require them.”
Magnetic field turbulence may have allowed aurora to occur more widely 41,000 years ago
evgeniyq/istockphoto/get ty image
About 41,000 years ago, Earth’s magnetic fields became weaker to only a few modern levels, with a significant increase in radiation impacting the planet’s surface. Some researchers suggest that while the Lasshamps event may have driven Neanderthals to extinction, as is known, modern humans may have protected themselves using tailored clothing and ochre sunscreen.
Earth’s magnetic field spreads out into space and acts as a protective shield against harmful radiation. Magnetic poles usually line up at the North and Antarctic, but sometimes wander due to changes in the planet’s liquid outer core.
“This system variation can lead to variations in the strength and direction of the Earth’s magnetic field, such as those observed during the Laschamps event,” he says. Agnit Mukhopadhyay At the University of Michigan.
By studying magnetic features preserved in volcanic rocks and sediments, Mukopadiyai and his colleagues created a detailed 3D reconstruction of the Earth’s magnetic field during the Raschamp event.
They found evidence that the magnetic pole shifted towards the equator, making the field strength weaker to 10% of today’s levels.
Auroras made by charged particles are usually only visible near the poles, but this will change during the Laschamp event. “The aurora can be seen in a much larger area, perhaps even near the equator,” says Mukopadhyai.
The weakened magnetic field could have allowed more sun and cosmic radiation to reach the Earth’s surface, changing the climate of the region. “These environmental changes may have encouraged adaptive behavior in human populations, including increased use of protective clothing for UV shields and ochre,” says Mukhopadhyay.
Researchers argue that the production of tailored clothing and the use of reddish mineral ochre as sunscreen may have been given Homo sapiens Benefits for Neanderthals who are thought to have become extinct during this period.
“There is definitely a rough overlap in terms of timing between the ancient modern invasion of Europe and the events of Las Shampus,” he says. Amy Mosig Way At the Australian Museum in Sydney. “But it is probably stretch to say that modern humans are better sunscreen in the form of tailored clothing than Neanderthals, and that’s probably what it is to say that this contributed to the ability to travel even further than the Neanderthals and subsequent Eurasian rule.”
Veronica Wowl Yale University says there is evidence of ancients who used ochre at this time. For example, the Ethiopian PORC-EPIC site records ochre use 45,000 years ago, which she says was enhanced 40,000 years ago. They may have used it for other reasons such as creating sunscreen and artwork and adhesives.
Ladis Laf Neyman JCMM in the Czech Republic says it is not known whether modern humans have used ochre as sunscreen. “If that were the case, it could have protected them more, but it didn’t necessarily save them,” he says. “Europeans were really piling up against them at the time.”
He points out that the Raschamp event coincided with a very cold period known as Heinrich Event 4 and a massive volcanic eruption in Italy called the Campania Ignimbrite Explosion.
“The big advantage Homo sapiens What they had as a species compared to Neanderthals was that they had a large population of other people living in Africa and elsewhere. Homo sapiens After these events, we may move to Europe,” says Neyman.
In these turbulent times, there is a growing interest in cryonics as a way to freeze and preserve human remains for potential revival in the future when medical technology is more advanced.
The concept is intriguing – it’s like a savepoint in a video game where you can “undo” your life experiences and start anew when revived.
Despite the increasing enthusiasm for cryonics, there are significant challenges that need to be addressed before it can be considered a viable option.
Freezing Limitations
Freezing living organisms at ultra-low temperatures often results in irreparable damage, leading to death. The human body, being primarily composed of water, cannot withstand the formation of ice crystals that can cause extensive harm to cells and tissues.
While anti-freeze agents can help mitigate this damage at a cellular level, the complexity of the human body poses a greater challenge when trying to freeze it effectively.
Freezing the human body for cryonics often causes irreversible cell damage, especially in the brain, making revival virtually impossible with current technology. – Photo credit: Getty
read more:
Freezing and thawing the human brain poses a particularly daunting task due to the complexity and vulnerability of brain cells. Neurons, being highly energy-dependent and structurally intricate, are difficult to preserve and repair through cryogenic processes.
Challenges with Brain Preservation
Many proponents of cryonics opt to freeze only the head or brain under the assumption that advancements in medicine can facilitate the replacement of the rest of the body. However, reanimating a frozen brain presents significant hurdles.
Neurons, the building blocks of brain function, are fragile and sensitive to damage. The intricate connections between neurons, which form the basis of memories and identity, are easily disrupted during the freezing process, making reconstruction a monumental task.
Even if future technologies can restore neuronal connections, the complexity of mapping these connections accurately without prior brain scans poses a significant challenge.
Ultimately, while cryonics offers hope for the future, it also requires a substantial amount of optimism given the current limitations and uncertainties surrounding the process.
Refineries in New Mexico are blaming the federal government for severe air pollution issues.
A chemical plant in Louisiana is under investigation for gas leaks from storage tanks.
An Idaho rancher is accused of polluting wetlands.
Under President Biden, the Environmental Protection Agency took a strong stance on environmental enforcement against pollution and waste violations. On the other hand, the Trump administration aims to shift the EPA’s focus from environmental protection to reducing costs related to transportation, heating, and business operations. The stability of long-term research initiatives is now uncertain due to recent EPA policy changes.
A memo from March 12 states that EPA enforcement actions will not intervene in energy production unless there is an immediate health risk. The memo also undermines President Biden’s efforts to address pollution disparities affecting low-income communities. It emphasizes that no consideration should be given to the affected individuals’ minority or economic status.
EPA Administrator, Lee Zeldin, believes these changes enable agents to focus on their core mission and contribute to a successful American resurgence.
David Ullman, who oversaw enforcement at the EPA during the Biden administration, criticized the recent memo for absolving corporations, especially in the oil and gas industry, of responsibility for breaking the law.
He expressed concern that these changes harm communities across the United States.
EPA spokesperson, Molly Vaseliou, refrained from commenting on ongoing investigations. The Justice Department, facing internal issues and budget cuts, also chose not to comment.
Conservatives argue that EPA regulations hinder economic growth and investment, while supporters believe that deregulation efforts will boost American energy and reduce costs for families.
Despite ongoing enforcement cases initiated by the Biden administration, the direction of the EPA’s objectives is shifting under the Trump administration, including the removal of key environmental regulations.
RJust before last week's newsletter was published, a short selling firm called Hindenburg Research issued the following report. Highly critical report on Roblox. In it, they accuse public companies of inflating their metrics (and thus their valuations), and even more worryingly for the parents of the millions of children who use Roblox. He also called it a “pedophile's hellscape.'’ The report claims that there were some gruesome discoveries within the game. Researchers found chat rooms of people purporting to exchange images and videos of children, and users claiming to be children or teens offering such material in exchange for Robux, an in-game currency. I discovered it. roblox I strongly refuse The claims made by Hindenburg in his report.
For those unfamiliar with the title, Roblox is more of a platform than a game (or, as corporate communicators like to think of it, a metaverse). It claims 80 million daily users (though Hindenburg says this figure is inflated). Log in, customize your avatar, and from there you can dive into thousands of different “experiences” created by other users. From role-playing cities to pizza delivery mini-games to cops-and-robbers games to cops-and-robbers games and, unfortunately, much less, Public Bathroom Simulator (which the creators say was 12 years old before they realized bad people existed) It is a delicious dish that looks like the one that he made at the time of his death. Roblox games are created by players, so the site must be constantly moderated. The company's moderation team handles a huge amount of content every day.
It's important to recognize that Hindenburg has a vested interest in making Roblox a stock tank. Hindenburg has a short position in the company (meaning it stands to profit if the stock price falls). Several other companies I've seen their stocks crater after releasing a report on them. However, it is also possible to independently verify some of the claims made in the report. A very quick search of the platform reveals that these in-game chat groups that appear to be soliciting and trading images do indeed exist and are active. And the accounts with questionable usernames that reference child abuse and Jeffrey Epstein are genuine. Some of the specific games and accounts mentioned in Hindenburg's report last week have been removed by the company.
Roblox defended itself in a statement posted online, saying, “Every day, tens of millions of users of all ages have safe and positive experiences on Roblox, and we adhere to our community standards.” said. But any safety incident is terrifying. We take content and conduct that does not adhere to our standards on our platform very seriously. ” The company further added: “We are continually evolving and enhancing our safety approach to catch and prevent malicious and harmful activity, including text chat filters that block inappropriate words and phrases; , which includes disallowing image sharing between users on Roblox” (as further reported in this article in the Guardian).
If your kids are playing on a platform like Roblox, triple-check their settings. Photo: Phil Noble/Reuters
Of course, this isn't the first sensational report about Roblox. In recent years, articles in CNN, the Observer, Wired, and many other publications have found that there is a large amount of inappropriate content on the platform, and that child predators are There are also some proven cases of using Roblox for crafting. Last July, More from Bloomberg In one such case, a man was sentenced to 15 years in prison for grooming a minor and having her cross state lines to perform sex acts as part of a broader investigation into the platform's apparent flaws in moderation and child safety. He was sentenced in 2018.
Many parents are worried about what to do. Roblox is part of the daily online lives of millions of children, even if the figure of around 80 million daily users is inflated, as Hindenberg claims. Anyone who has children of school age knows that it is very widely used. Is Roblox dangerous for kids? Should they stop playing it immediately?
Despite everything presented in this and other reports over the past few years, I believe it is entirely possible for children to play Roblox safely. Appropriate parental controls are in place to limit or eliminate the extent to which strangers can contact your child. When used correctly. If I had kids playing Roblox, I'd be checking all of these settings over and over again to make sure the “friends list” feature was set to include only real-life friends. We also recommend supervising young children to minimize the likelihood that they will encounter or actually seek out the many inappropriate games that seem to regularly elude Roblox's management efforts. I'm very reluctant to let you play this game without it.
Basic online safety education is critical for all children who use the Internet. Given the multiple convictions of child predators who used Roblox to access children, it is impossible to deny the presence of pedophiles on the platform, but it is difficult to objectively assess the extent of it. It's difficult. Some of what Hindenburg highlights in his report seems to me more likely to be the product of an adolescent fringe master than an actual child predator. Roblox is full of teenagers who have grown up with the game. When you see 900 variations of the username Jeffrey Epstein, you don't necessarily see 900 active child abusers, you see 900 stupid 14-year-olds trying to be funny. .
Full disclosure: I don't let my kids play Roblox, and I have no intention of starting them. I don't believe that a publicly traded company can be trusted to put the interests and safety of children ahead of profits. Moderation is expensive and difficult. No one in the big tech industry is any closer to building a system to prevent harmful material from appearing on these types of open platforms, or to prevent people from exploiting harmful material for their own purposes. No. Legitimate safety concerns aside, rather than trying to squeeze money out of kids to pay for endless in-game cosmetics and “experiences,” it's simply better to serve kids' imaginations and curiosity. There are hundreds of great games.
Only offline games can completely eliminate this risk of children being exposed to inappropriate content. After just a few hours of exploring Roblox, one thing is abundantly clear. It's not hard to find something very problematic.
what to play
The wolf in the game Neva grows into a magnificent creature crowned with horns that protects you.
Neva, a game about a warrior and a she-wolf, surprised me. I've played so many beautiful, artistic indie platformers that it’s hard to find one that really makes me feel something. But there I was ugly crying in front of the TV after a few nights with Neva. It takes place over four seasons. The wolf starts out as a cub that you have to protect, but later grows into a magnificent creature with horns that can protect you. Use an elegant combination of jumps, double jumps, dashes, and strikes to explore an incredibly beautiful but horribly corrupt natural world and make multiple attempts to conquer the demons that poison it. Worth a few hours of anyone's life.
Available: PC, PS5, Nintendo Switch, Xbox Approximate play time: 3-4 hours
The cause of the Alamo…Nintendo's new clock. Photo: Nintendo
On Friday, a group of people who worked on highly acclaimed psychology and political science research RPG Disco Elysium announced the creation of a new studio to work on the game's spiritual successor. Then, confusingly, another new studio was announced same thingThis time it comes with a trailer. And on the same day, a third group announced another spiritual successor. as one viral tweet “Disco Elysium splitting into three unions claiming succession is more of a commentary on communism than the game wanted.”
A premium book/magazine hybrid about video games. above, Released today. Guardian games correspondent Keith Stuart and I feature in issue one. Naturally, his article is about Sega arcade boards and mine is about Nintendo details.
game freakThe developer of Pokemon suffered a hack of almost unprecedented scale.: Details about unreleased Pokemon game and movie projects, employee information, source code, and details about the series' development. decades I'm there now.
To cap off a truly bizarre week of video game news: nintendo We have announced an alarm clock that watches over you while you are sleeping. It's called “Alarmo,” and it wakes you up with the not-so-gentle sounds of Mario, Splatoon, or Zelda, synchronized with your groggy morning movements. the available now For those willing to jump through a few hoops (and pay £90).
Supermodel Elle Macpherson refuses chemotherapy to treat breast cancer
Australian Press Agency/Alamy
Half of us will develop cancer at some point in our lives, but how many of us can confidently reject mainstream medical advice after consulting dozens of doctors?
In a recent interview Australian Women's Weekly Australian supermodel Elle Macpherson revealed that she did just that, telling the magazine that she was diagnosed with breast cancer seven years ago but refused chemotherapy, opting for an “intuitive, heart-led, holistic approach” to her treatment.
According to the magazine, MacPherson mulled over her decision for weeks after consulting with “32 doctors and specialists,” and finally, in February 2017, she decided to pursue non-pharmaceutical treatment under the guidance of her family doctor, who specializes in “integrative medicine.”
Fortunately, MacPherson is currently in clinical remission, or as she prefers to say, “perfect health.” It's futile to try to assess the risk of her decision to forego chemotherapy without knowing important details about the extent of her cancer, her coexisting risk factors, and the advice she received. For example, she underwent a partial mastectomy, her first surgery to remove a suspicious lump, but Some doctors said That might have been enough treatment.
Nevertheless, the story has sparked outrage online, galvanizing both the growing number of people who distrust “conventional medicine” and those who seek to defend it from growing attacks.
What's behind this distrust? Some researchers say the COVID-19 pandemic “Scientific skepticism” Heated debates are taking place around the world about the severity of the illness, the merits of lockdowns, and the safety of vaccines. More and moreUsed To hide their anti-scientific views, Conspiracy thinking.
For members of black and minority ethnic communities, Distrust of doctors The reluctance to seek cancer testing and treatment is also being driven by public health and medical institutions. Decades of failure Engaging with them and ensuring equal care in many countries.
In the UK in particular, confidence in the National Health Service's ability to treat cancer has declined. Has fallen in recent yearsand Reports Delaying the start of vital cancer treatment for months.
All of this means that if you're diagnosed with cancer today, your options may seem less clear than they once were. Add to that the typically grueling experience of chemotherapy, and it's no wonder that MacPherson's story of a “non-pharmaceutical” alternative therapy has garnered so much attention.
But it's worth keeping in mind that MacPherson doesn't accurately represent the vast majority of cancer patients. Estimated Net Worth With a net worth of $95 million, she can afford to seek multiple second opinions and even turn down chemotherapy. Her wealth acts as a safety net. Her “ingestible health” company WELCOand her historical romantic ties Disgraced anti-vaxxer Andrew Wakefield,she From 2018 to 2019McPherson's story gets even more complicated.
For most people, refusing medical care carries real risks. 2017 Study Cancer patients who choose alternative medicines as their primary treatment have been found to have a higher risk of dying within five years than those who choose conventional treatments.
Larger studies The following year, he published a study of nearly two million American cancer patients that found that use of complementary medicines was associated with refusal of conventional cancer treatment and a doubling of the risk of death within five years.
But for now, at least, the advice from organisations like Cancer Research UK is clear: there is no scientific or medical evidence that alternative therapies can cure cancer. At a time when distrust of medicine is widespread, Macpherson's account risks leading people down a dangerous path by trumpeting positive results without important context.
While anyone may be at risk for developing cancer, Macpherson, who was nicknamed “The Body” at the height of her modeling career, had enormous resources at her disposal and was always going to have a better chance than most of us of surviving cancer, regardless of her choices.
The Environmental Protection Agency announced on Tuesday that an emergency order has been issued. This action is the first of its kind in almost four decades and aims to halt the use of pesticides that may harm unborn babies.
The herbicide in question, dimethyltetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA or Dacthal), is commonly used to control weeds in various crops like broccoli, onions, kale, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, and strawberries.
Exposure to this chemical during pregnancy can lead to changes in thyroid hormone levels in the fetus, which could result in long-term negative impacts such as low birth weight, impaired brain development, lower IQ, and diminished motor skills later in life, according to the EPA.
This risk prompted the EPA to take decisive action and suspend the use of the pesticide. Michal Friedhoff, deputy director of the Office for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, stated, “DCPA is extremely dangerous and needs to be removed from the market immediately.” The agency emphasized this in a statement.
The emergency order is now in effect.
Friedhoff further emphasized the EPA’s role in safeguarding the public from hazardous chemicals, saying, “In this case, a pregnant woman who unknowingly encounters DCPA could give birth to a child with irreversible health issues.”
The DCPA has been banned in the European Union since 2009.
Miri Treviño Sauceda, executive director of the National Farmers Union, praised the EPA’s decision as “historic.”
The suspension follows years of dialogue between the EPA and AMVAC Chemical Corporation, the sole manufacturer of DCPA.
The company has not responded to requests for comment.
In 2013, the EPA requested data from AMVAC on the herbicide’s health effects, specifically requesting comprehensive studies on DCPA’s impact on thyroid development. Despite receiving multiple studies from AMVAC between 2013 and 2021, the EPA found the data inadequate and did not accept certain requests, including the thyroid study, until it was finally submitted in August 2022.
The EPA’s recent assessment of DCPA was part of a routine process to reassess registered pesticides. Inspections occur every 15 years to ensure there are no adverse health effects or environmental hazards.
California is bracing for a dangerous combination of extreme heat and high fire risk this week as people across the state celebrate Independence Day outdoors. Temperatures in the Sacramento Valley could soar to 115 degrees Fahrenheit, according to meteorologist Kate Forrest from the National Weather Service in Sacramento. Heat warnings have been issued for the region starting Tuesday and are expected to last through Saturday.
Forecasters anticipate the heat wave to start in inland California on Tuesday before spreading to the Pacific Northwest and Southern California later in the week. Heat watches, warnings, and advisories will be in effect across the West on Tuesday from southern Oregon to southeastern California’s low desert according to the National Weather Service.
The increase in temperatures is due to a strong high-pressure system lingering in the region. Governor Gavin Newsom has instructed emergency officials to activate the state’s operations center in response to the upcoming heatwave.
The hot weather could see nighttime temperatures exceed 80 degrees Fahrenheit in some areas, with inland California facing “extreme” conditions by Friday, as indicated on the Heat Risk Map from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Weather Service.
Southern Oregon, including the Medford area, is also under a heat watch through Saturday. Meanwhile, Pacific Gas & Electric has warned of potential power outages in 10 California counties on Tuesday due to high winds and dry conditions.
Given the high temperatures and dry conditions, there is an increased risk of wildfires, prompting caution during Fourth of July celebrations involving fireworks. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection is monitoring 13 active fires in the state.
Climate change has been linked to the increased frequency and intensity of heat waves and wildfires. Analysis from Climate Central shows that regions like the Sacramento Valley are experiencing more fire-prone weather compared to previous decades.
With heat waves growing in frequency and duration, it is important for residents to take precautions to stay safe during extreme weather events.
Astronauts Robert L. Curbeam Jr. (left) and Christer Fugelsang aboard the International Space Station
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
How spaceflight affects astronauts' health may be better understood thanks to the creation of the first “space-omics” biobank, a collection of thousands of blood and tissue samples and medical information taken on multiple space missions.
These include missions to the International Space Station as well as SpaceX's Inspiration 4, the first private spaceflight to send four non-government-trained astronauts into space for three days in 2021.
The resource, called the Space Omics and Medical Atlas (SOMA), contains detailed medical data, collectively known as biomarkers, such as DNA damage and changes in people's gene activity and immune system function.
Space flight is known to pose certain health risks. For example, astronauts experience reduced bone density and muscle mass due to weightlessness, and high levels of radiation in space can damage cells and DNA, causing a variety of health effects on the body. Astronauts are more likely to develop heart disease Later years and Some people have experienced a decrease in vision After going into space.
By consistently collecting astronauts' medical data through the SOMA biobank, researchers may be able to better understand these changes and develop ways to mitigate them, the researchers say. Christopher Mason He is a professor at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York and helped establish the biobank.
“Biomarkers don't necessarily translate into anything clinically meaningful, but they're a good way to understand how this unique environment is affecting us.” Damien Bailey The researchers are from the University of South Wales in the UK, but were not involved in the study.
One of the findings from the Inspiration 4 mission was that although astronauts experienced changes in numerous biomarkers, most measurements returned to normal within a few months of returning to Earth.
This suggests that sending private citizens into space poses no greater health risks than sending professional astronauts, Mason said. “Instead of training them for decades, we can start opening up space to more people.”
Results from Inspiration 4, which had two men and two women on board, also suggested that changes in gene activity returned to normal more quickly in women. This may be because women's bodies have to be able to cope with the possibility of pregnancy, Mason says. “Being able to withstand big changes in physiology and fluid dynamics could be great for managing pregnancy, but it could also help manage the stresses of spaceflight.”
Timothy Etheridge A researcher from the University of Exeter in the UK says it would be beneficial to have a common resource that researchers around the world can use. “We need a consistent approach to collecting samples,” he says.
Thomas Smith The researcher, from King's College London, says understanding the health effects of spaceflight will become even more important if longer-term missions take place, such as trips to Mars. “Anything that leads to longer-term missions makes it even more important to know what's going on and, ideally, to be able to address it,” he says.
A group of current and former employees from prominent artificial intelligence companies has published an open letter. The committee warned of inadequate safety oversight within the industry and called for better protection for whistleblowers.
The letter, advocating for a “right to warn about artificial intelligence,” is a rare public statement about the risks of AI from employees in a usually secretive industry. It was signed by 11 current and former employees of OpenAI and two current and former Google DeepMind employees, one of whom previously worked at Anthropic.
“AI companies have valuable non-public information about their systems’ capabilities, limitations, safeguards, and risk of harm. However, they have minimal obligations to share this information with governments and none with the public. We cannot rely on companies to share this information voluntarily,” the letter stated.
OpenAI defended its practices, stating that they have hotlines and mechanisms for issue reporting, and they do not release new technology without proper safeguards. Google did not respond immediately to a comment request.
Concerns about the potential dangers of artificial intelligence have been around for years, but the recent AI boom has heightened these concerns, leading regulators to struggle to keep up with technological advancements. While AI companies claim to be developing their technology safely, researchers and employees warn about a lack of oversight to prevent AI tools from exacerbating existing societal harms or creating new ones.
The letter also mentions a bill seeking to enhance protections for AI company employees who raise safety concerns. The bill calls for transparency and accountability principles, including not forcing employees to sign agreements that prevent them from discussing risk-related AI issues publicly.
In a recent report, it was revealed that companies like OpenAI have tactics to discourage employees from freely discussing their work, with consequences for those who speak out. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman apologized for these practices and promised changes to exit procedures.
The open letter echoes concerns raised by former top OpenAI employees about the company’s lack of transparency in its operations. It comes after recent resignations of key OpenAI employees over disagreements about the company’s safety culture.
Companies will now be required to disclose information on how climate change could impact their financial performance, although not as detailed as initially proposed.
The Securities and Exchange Commission recently approved new climate risk disclosure rules, a significant change that mandates companies to include details about their emissions and other important risks they face in their public disclosures.
While some critics argue that the rules have been diluted due to pressure from business leaders, others believe this is an opportunity for investors to better understand the economic risks associated with climate change.
Many large companies already voluntarily disclose this information, and experts believe that the new rules could help reduce greenwashing, establish a common disclosure standard, and improve transparency for investors.
The adoption of these rules reflects a growing recognition within the business community about the economic risks of climate change, shifting from a previously abstract issue to a tangible threat that requires regulatory attention.
According to Cynthia Hanawalt, from Columbia University’s Sabin Center on Climate Change Law, the rules represent a significant step towards standardizing information for investors and enhancing transparency regarding the risks posed by climate change.
The rules were proposed in 2022 and have faced significant scrutiny, resulting in a final version that excludes the disclosure of Scope 3 emissions, which are indirect emissions associated with a company’s supply chain and product use.
As the rules are phased in, only large companies with a market value of at least $75 million will be required to disclose their emissions information, potentially impacting sectors such as automotive, agriculture, and cement.
Despite the limitations of the final rules, experts believe that they will set a new standard for climate risk disclosure globally and influence expectations in capital markets.
While the rules have been praised for promoting transparency and accountability, they may face legal and political challenges from groups seeking stricter disclosure requirements and opponents of such regulations.
Overall, the new rules aim to help companies manage their climate and emissions goals, prevent greenwashing, and provide investors with crucial information about the risks associated with climate change.
Legal challenges are anticipated, and resolution could take years, as the SEC works to address concerns from both sides of the debate.
evan bush
Evan Bush is a science reporter for NBC News. Contact him at Evan.Bush@nbcuni.com.
It has been 100 days since the war in Gaza began, and it has become increasingly difficult to read the news. Her husband told me it might be time to talk to a therapist. Instead, on a cold winter morning, after fighting back tears as I read another tale of human tragedy, I turned to artificial intelligence.
“I’m pretty depressed about the state of the world,” I typed into ChatGPT. “It’s natural to feel overwhelmed,” the magazine responded, offering a list of practical advice, including limiting media exposure, focusing on the positive and practicing self-care.
I closed the chat. I was sure that I would benefit from doing all this, but at that moment I didn’t feel much better.
It may seem strange that an AI would even try to provide this kind of assistance. But millions of people have already turned to his ChatGPT, a professional therapy chatbot that provides convenient and inexpensive mental health support. Even doctors are said to be using AI to create more empathetic notes for patients.
Some experts say this is a boon. After all, AI may be able to express empathy more openly and tirelessly than humans, unhindered by shame or burnout. “We admire empathetic AI” by a group of psychological researchers I wrote recently.
But others are not so sure. Many people question the idea that AI can be empathetic and worry about the consequences if people seek emotional support from machines that can only pretend to care. Some even wonder if the rise of so-called empathic AI might change the way we think…
Immersing your body in cold water stimulates the release of an invigorating cocktail of chemicals.
Jacob Staedler/EyeEm/Getty Images
“It's like pressing Control-Alt-Del on your computer,” says Cath Pendleton. “When I'm in the water, I get so focused on my body that my brain switches off. It's just swimming with me.”
Pendleton, an ice swimmer based in Merthyr Tydfil, England, is as tough as anyone. In 2020, five years after she realized she didn't mind swimming in very cold water, she became the first person to swim one mile inside the Antarctic Circle. Part of her training included sitting in a freezer in a shed.
But she's not the only one passionate about cold water. Rivers, lakes, and oceans that were once home to a handful of serious year-round swimmers are now on the verge of extinction, thanks to media reports about the mental health impact of frigid dips and pool closures due to COVID-19. The number of people visiting is rapidly increasing. An estimated 7.5 million people swim outdoors in the UK alone, and more and more people swim outdoors during the winter. Global numbers are hard to come by, but the International Winter Swimming Association is seeing a boom in winter swimmer registrations around the world, including in China, Russia and Finland, where water temperatures can drop below 0C.
But what could be better than the joy of being in nature and the perverted feeling of happiness that defies the cold? According to the latest research, the answer is probably: Recent studies are beginning to uncover evidence that cold water immersion can reduce stress and depression, and may help deal with autoimmune diseases.
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.
