Tag Archives: urgent

Combating Measles: The Urgent Need to Tackle Misinformation Epidemic

Posted on by
Reply

Vaccine uptake is crucial for public health

Vaccine Uptake: Essential for Public Health

Robin Utrecht/Shutterstock

In a shocking turnabout, a 1998 study falsely claimed a connection between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism. I was astounded by the study’s poor quality, its acceptance by a prestigious journal, and the lack of critical reporting by journalists. At that time, I was unaware that the research was fraudulent.

Nearly three decades later, the repercussions of these misleading claims still echo globally. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that six countries, including the UK (for the second time), Spain, and Austria, have lost their measles-free status. This decline in vaccination rates has been significantly influenced by an anti-vaccination movement propagated by that erroneous paper. Meanwhile, the United States faces its worst outbreak in decades and would have also lost its measles-free status had it not withdrawn from the WHO.

Measles is one of the most contagious viruses on the planet, causing severe complications in around 1 in 5 children. Complications may lead to lasting brain damage, respiratory issues, hearing loss, blindness, and brain swelling. The WHO estimates that approximately 95,000 people may succumb to measles in 2024.

The actual impact extends further, as measles also destroys immune cells that help protect against other infections, diminishing immunity for around five years. It is a risk not worth taking.

Fortunately, measles has specific vulnerabilities. The virus first targets immune cells, travels to lymph nodes, and then disseminates throughout the body. This complex pathway enhances the immune system’s ability to combat the virus before it fully establishes an infection, unlike respiratory viruses that primarily attack cells in the nose and throat.

This is why the measles component in the MMR vaccine is highly effective. Countless studies confirm that vaccinated children are significantly better off, with no established link to autism. One compelling observation is that when the MMR vaccine was withdrawn in Japan, autism rates remained unchanged.

To maintain herd immunity, at least 95% of children must be vaccinated to ensure that each infected individual transmits the virus to fewer than one other person. This means that a small percentage of unvaccinated children can precipitate another outbreak of measles.

Globally, vaccination rates are improving, but there is still room for growth. The percentage of children receiving the first dose of the measles vaccine increased from 71% in 2000 to 84% in 2010. Despite a slight decline during the COVID-19 pandemic, the rates have rebounded. The WHO estimates that between 2000 and 2024, measles vaccination has prevented an impressive 60 million deaths worldwide, marking a significant victory.

However, in high-income nations, progress is stalling. After the erroneous claims of 1998, MMR vaccination levels fell to only 80% in England and Wales. By 2013, intake rates exceeded 90% but have been gradually decreasing since then. A recent report indicated that this decline in the UK is partly because access to vaccinations is becoming increasingly difficult for parents, a concern that warrants urgent attention.

Additionally, the resurgence of anti-vaccine sentiments is contributing to these challenges, closely linked to right-wing extremism as propagated on specific social media platforms. A quick search for “MMR measles” on Bluesky yielded no anti-vaccine posts in the top results, while the search on X surfaced a plethora of misleading anti-vaccine rhetoric.

Combatting this misinformation is a considerable challenge, especially when high-profile individuals on social media platforms align with disinformation, such as a certain billionaire collaborating with a known liar leading the world’s wealthiest nation and appointing an anti-vaxxer as health secretary.

What’s evident is that this crisis extends beyond vaccines; it’s crucial in areas like climate science where misinformation clouds the truth. Governments throughout Europe and beyond must take decisive action to regulate the infosphere, promote scientific integrity, and silence charlatans. The future of humanity is at stake.

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Urgent Climate Consequences Arriving Ahead of Schedule Could Drain Trillions from the Global Economy

Posted on by
Reply

Wildfires in California - January 2025

Wildfires in California – January 2025

David McNew/Getty Images

The impact of climate change is accelerating faster than anticipated, with governments and businesses continuing to underestimate associated risks. These risks could lead to economic losses reaching trillions of dollars by 2050.

According to reports from climate scientists and financial experts, the world might be significantly underestimating the speed of global warming, facing the prospect of “planetary bankruptcy.” This means climate change could cause extensive damage to both the environment and economic growth.

Decision-makers often concentrate on intermediate climate impact estimates. However, with phenomena such as extreme precipitation occurring sooner than projected, preparations for worst-case scenarios are necessary, as indicated in the report.

“Urgent global cooperation on a solvency plan is essential,” says David King, former chief climate adviser to the UK government, who contributed to the report. “We’re experiencing an acceleration in temperature rise. While the future is uncertain, it’s reasonable to assume that this trend won’t reverse.”

The initial step towards such a plan could involve reevaluating the assumption that the global economy will continue to grow indefinitely. Sandy Trust, a British investment manager at Baillie Gifford, remarked that according to the Network for Greening the Financial System, the world could incur trillions in annual losses by 2050 due to climate impacts. However, the network believes that a recession is unlikely, as global economic growth might outpace these losses.

“This is akin to Titanic risk modeling, predicting a smooth journey from the deck of the Titanic in April 1912,” Trust adds. “Such assumptions overlook fundamental principles of risk management—most notably, the importance of planning for worst-case scenarios.”

Preparation for the worst is critical, according to a report from the European Union’s Copernicus climate change agency. The study highlighted that 2025 was the third warmest year on record, with average temperatures rising 1.47 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The temperatures in 2024 were even higher, leading to a three-year average exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius for the first time.

This growth represents a step closer to the 20-30 year average needed to achieve the Paris Agreement goal of limiting temperature rises to below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Ten years since the agreement was signed, projections indicated that the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold would be reached by 2045. However, if current trends persist, according to Copernicus’ data, we could breach this critical limit by 2030.

Scientists indicate that the rate of global warming is speeding up, largely due to declining air pollution levels, including sulfur emissions from coal-fired power plants and shipping. With clearer skies, more sunlight reaches the Earth, leading to an apparent increase of about 0.5 degrees Celsius.

However, the primary factor behind breaching the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold sooner than predicted is the relentless rise in greenhouse gas emissions. Samantha Burgess from Copernicus emphasizes that fossil fuel emissions are expected to hit record levels in 2025.

“Emissions are not decreasing as quickly as anticipated,” Burgess comments.

With each increment of warming, extreme weather events become increasingly frequent and severe. The January 2025 wildfires in Los Angeles may potentially mark the most costly natural disaster in U.S. history, exacerbated by the climate crisis which will likely double their frequency and amplify their severity by 25 times. Hurricane Melissa, the most powerful storm to make landfall in the Atlantic, had wind speeds at least 10 miles per hour higher than would normally be expected without climate change.

“This figure represents a global average; thus, 1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming means that heatwaves can be 3 to 4 degrees, or even 10 degrees hotter than usual,” Burgess explains. “The younger generation will face even more extreme heat and climate risks than we did.”

The polar regions are warming at a pace faster than others, mainly due to feedback mechanisms, such as the loss of reflective snow and ice. In fact, last year witnessed record warmth in Antarctica, attributed to an unusual stratospheric heating event. The extent of sea ice across the Arctic and Antarctic has now reached unprecedented lows.

On a positive note, global emissions are showing a leveling-off trend, specifically in China, where emissions have stabilized.

“With CO2 emissions plateauing, we anticipate continued warming, but not at an accelerated rate,” states Timothy Osborne of the University of East Anglia, UK.

Addressing methane leaks from infrastructures like gas pipelines and aging coal mines could provide a short-term solution, King suggests. Reducing methane emissions by 30% over the next decade could mitigate global warming by at least 0.2 degrees Celsius by 2050.

“We must also tackle other slow-moving issues, which are vital elements of our path forward,” King asserts. “An overshoot beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius presents significant challenges for humanity.”

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

AI Chatbot Fails to Address Urgent Women’s Health Concerns: Key Issues Highlighted

Posted on by
Reply

Sure! Here’s an SEO-optimized rewrite of your content while keeping the HTML tags intact:

AI Health Information

AI Tools for Women’s Health: Incomplete Answers

Oscar Wong/Getty Images

Current AI models frequently struggle to provide accurate diagnoses or advice for pressing women’s health inquiries.

Thirteen AI language models from OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, Mistral AI, and xAI were assessed with 345 medical questions spanning five fields, including emergency medicine, gynecology, and neurology. These questions were curated by 17 experts in women’s health, pharmacists, and clinicians from the US and Europe.

Expert reviewers analyzed the AI responses, cross-referencing failures against a medical expertise benchmark which includes 96 queries.

On average, 60% of the queries yielded inadequate responses based on expert evaluations. Notably, GPT-5 was the strongest performer, with a 47% failure rate, while Mistral 8B exhibited a significant 73% failure rate.

“I see more women using AI for health queries and decision support,” says Victoria-Elizabeth Gruber, a representative from Lumos AI, a firm focused on enhancing AI model assessments. She and her colleagues recognized the potential dangers of relying on technology that perpetuates existing gender imbalances in medical knowledge. “This inspired us to establish the first benchmark in this domain,” she explains.

Gruber expressed surprise over the high failure rates, stating, “We anticipated some disparities, but the variability among models was striking.”

This outcome is not unexpected, according to Kara Tannenbaum at the University of Montreal, Canada, as AI models are trained on historical data that may inherently contain biases. “It’s crucial for online health information sources and professional associations to enhance their web content with more detailed, evidence-based insights related to sex and gender to better inform AI,” she emphasizes.

Jonathan H. Chen from Stanford University notes that the claimed 60% failure rate may be misleading. “This figure is based on a limited expert-defined sample, which does not accurately represent regular inquiries from patients and doctors,” he asserts. “Some test scenarios are overly cautious and can lead to higher failure rates.” For instance, if a postpartum woman reports a headache, the model might fail if pre-eclampsia isn’t immediately suspected.

Gruber acknowledges such critiques, clarifying, “Our intent was not to label the model as broadly unsafe but to establish clear, clinically relevant evaluation criteria. We purposefully set strict benchmarks as minor omissions in the medical field can be significant in some cases.”

An OpenAI representative stated: “ChatGPT aims to support, not replace, healthcare services. We closely collaborate with clinicians globally to refine our models and continuously evaluate them to minimize harmful or misleading output. Our latest GPT-5.2 models are designed to consider critical user contexts, including gender. We take the accuracy of our outputs seriously, and while ChatGPT can offer valuable insights, we advise consulting qualified healthcare providers for treatment and care decisions.” Other companies involved in the study did not respond to requests for comments from New Scientist.

Topics:

This rewrite optimizes the content for SEO by naturally incorporating keywords related to AI in women’s health, improving clarity, and emphasizing critical insights throughout the piece.

Source: www.newscientist.com

The Urgent Need to Discuss Geographic Engineering

Posted on by
Reply

We are moving towards a significantly warmer future. As we go, there’s a substantial risk of reaching a “tipping point” that could drastically worsen climate disruption. With our failure to decrease carbon emissions, geoengineering’s allure for cooling the planet is growing, but is that a sound solution?

“Geoengineering can avert climatic tipping points, but it can’t be delayed,” some researchers suggest, proposing that injecting solar-reflecting aerosols into the stratosphere might prevent collapse events, like the slowing of vital ocean currents. Yet, the risks associated with geoengineering are considerable.

Initially, achieving an international agreement on this matter seems unlikely; if a single country acts independently, it could lead to severe consequences, like altered rainfall patterns globally. If one nation perceives itself harmed by another’s geoengineering efforts, we might find ourselves in a climate conflict where geoengineering is weaponized.

Even with a consensus, the situation remains complicated. If geoengineering goes awry, it could worsen conditions instead of improving them. There have been too few practical tests of computer models and geoengineering concepts for us to feel confident in their efficacy.

We might face a climate war where geoengineering is employed as a weapon.

The urgency is palpable. The sooner geoengineering is initiated, the better our chances of evading perilous tipping points. At the very least, it’s an avenue worth exploring.

However, many scientists oppose geoengineering research altogether. One concern is that it could be leveraged as a rationale for neglecting carbon reduction efforts. But that discussion is hardly impactful in a reality where U.S. President Donald Trump has rolled back climate initiatives without much justification (see “What will climate repercussions look like from Trump’s ‘big beautiful bill’?”).

Geoengineering might be a catastrophic notion, but we won’t grasp its implications unless we conduct extensive research. This exploration is essential before we are compelled to take drastic measures without solid scientific guidance.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Will Allianz be the buyer for non-unicorn insurance company Luco in urgent need of a buyer?

Posted on by
Reply

How quickly time passes! Just a few weeks ago, shortly after its acquisition by British group Admiral was announced, French insurance tech company Luko advertised itself on billboards in the Paris metro, joking about the fact that it had previously won the “Next Unicorn” award. I was confident enough to say so. Fast forward to this week, and its parent company, his Demain ES, is being put up for sale. Legal notice in newspaper After the Admiral abandons ship.

What happened during this time was a wild ride from offer to offer until the courts put the brakes on a roller coaster that won’t end soon for the more than 120 employees whose jobs are on the line. It was a great journey. They already know they work for a non-unicorn company, but they’re probably keen to know if their next employer will be Allianz.

As for policyholders, Luko insists there is no need to worry. “Luco Cover, the broker and manager of the contracts sold by Luco, and Luco Insurance AG, the insurance company of the Luco Group.” [are] separate entity […]. Therefore, Ruco’s insurance and brokerage operations will continue to operate as usual,” the company said.

But it will not be business as usual for Mr. DeMaine following the court’s decision revealed this week. The startup’s parent company entered into accelerated safeguard proceedings in June. However, as a result of bankruptcy, they are now subject to judicial restructuring, which is a bad omen, since this process often ends in liquidation.

Of course, Luko is still available. Therefore, the following notice will be published in the newspaper. But despite the agreement the two companies signed in June this year, it is not Admiral’s fault: it has now been confirmed that the British insurance group withdrew from the agreement on October 20th.

Admiral will pay 14 million euros for Luko Cover, with the full amount of 11 million euros plus an additional 3 million euros related to certain milestones. This partly explains why the M&A process has been bumpy: Luko says: 72 million euros It is easy to imagine how difficult it was for the debtor to respond as the debtor was in the middle of a standalone transaction. But as we understand it, the biggest development was the admiral’s withdrawal.

There may not be just one reason why Admiral threw in the towel, and the macro context may be at play. However, according to court proceedings, Mr Admiral instead blamed a €2.3 million disagreement that arose during due diligence regarding the accounting treatment of insurance premiums collected by Ruco Cover on behalf of the insurance company, while offering VAT relief. The prospect also raised eyebrows. TechCrunch reached out to Admiral and its French subsidiary L’Olivier for confirmation, but did not hear back.

Despite this, Luco was surprisingly quick to find an alternative, court documents reveal. On November 8, the company received a formal offer from Allianz for the same assets that Admiral planned to acquire, but no commitments were made on the human resources side.

Although Allianz’s proposal did not guarantee job security for Demain and its subsidiaries, it seemed to make sense on a strategic level. In fact, incumbent insurance companies are preparing for: launchA French DTC insurtech platform called Allianz Direct. Meanwhile, Luco’s critics acknowledged that the company became the poster child for direct-to-consumer home insurance in France before expanding further.

How much Allianz offered depends on who you ask. Demain made an offer worth a total of 14 million euros. The tribunal disagreed and concluded that it was worth €8 million, with the remainder going towards assuming the debt. But of course, that’s yesterday’s price, not tomorrow’s price.

Allianz’s offer for Demain may still be valid even with the company under judicial restructuring, but it would be surprising if the price remained the same. On the other hand, its surroundings may also change. Demain is now less constrained in his dealings than he was when he had to find someone to accept the Admiral’s proposal.

However, Luko has parts that are not currently available for sale.

Earlier this year, German insurer GetSafe had already acquired a German customer portfolio from Luco’s acquisition of multi-product insurer Koya in 2022.

In addition, Ruco has entered the non-payment rent insurance business. Obtaining Uncle In the same year, the portfolio is now Acquired by French broker Solly Hazard Partnered with Sada Sompo Insurance. Both acquirers confirmed that these transactions are complete and independent of Mr. DeMaine’s judicial proceedings.

Still, Luko may be able to sell more than the Admiral wanted to buy. But what we want to know more about is who will buy Demain. Was it Allianz, which offered Demain an advance payment of 25,000 euros a day to keep the company afloat? Or could it be another possible buyer whose names have been floated at some point, such as AXA, Ornikar or Leocare?

The worst case scenario is that all offers disappear. If that were to happen, some may wish the court had been more flexible in considering Allianz’s offer. A person close to the matter told TechCrunch that the latest decision was already a bit of a surprise to Ruco. But from a legal perspective, it seemed inevitable. French law Safeguard procedures do not apply to insolvent companies, as they currently do in Demain.

Even if courts had some leeway, they would probably be reluctant to set a precedent, especially now that bankruptcy-related proceedings are becoming more common. Earlier this month, French mobility startup Cityscoot declared went bankrupt and placed after Under judicial rehabilitation. Maybe that’ll make it to the top, and maybe Ruco will as well. However, despite the possibility, not every company that once was a future unicorn will be.

Source: techcrunch.com