SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " human " 3,384 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Humana To Divest End-Of-Life Care Business For $900 Million
Humana, one of the largest U.S. sellers of Medicare Advantage insurance for older adults, will divest its stake in a provider of end-of-life services for $900 million.
Johns Hopkins announces major new investment in cutting-edge life sciences research
The Life Sciences Research Initiative will direct $80 million annually over the next two years to fuel breakthroughs and discoveries to improve human health
APSU to host Health and Performance Summit for sport, recovery, tactical fields
Austin Peay State University's Department of Health and Human Performance will host its inaugural Health and Performance Summit.
Richard Feynman’s 50-Year-Old 'Restaurant Problem' Finally Decoded. It Shows Why People Settle for Good Enough
The restaurant problem reveals why human shortcuts can work surprisingly well.
More than a Perk: 401(k)s are a Benefit Small Business Leaders Can’t Afford to Ignore
Two leaders discuss how automation, transparency, and smarter pricing for 401(k) plans are changing the game for employers looking for a competitive advantage.
'Project Hail Mary' Returns Atop Weekly U.K. Home Entertainment Sales Chart Through June 10
Amazon MGM Studios’ former chart topper Project Hail Mary, starring Ryan Gosling as a lone astronaut on a mission to save humanity, returned to No. 1 from No. 2 the previous week in its fourth week on the weekly Official Film Chart — the U.K. home entertainment sales chart. Last week’s No. 1, Universal’s The Super … Continue reading "‘Project Hail Mary’ Returns Atop Weekly U.K. Home Entertainment Sales Chart Through June 10"
Emory gets $15M NIH grant to research Superfund sites’ health effects
Emory University has been awarded a five-year, $15 million grant from the NIH to study the link between environmental contaminants and human health in Brunswick, Georgia, which is home to four of the state's 23 Superfund sites.
Oops, Scientists May Have Severely Miscalculated How Many Humans Are on Earth
While most estimates place the current human population at around 8.2 billion, a study suggests we might be vastly underrepresenting rural areas.
AAI Statement on House Appropriations Committee Markup of FY 2027 Labor, Health and Human Services Bill
AAI statement in respose to the House Appropriations Committee’s markup of the fiscal year (FY) 2027 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies appropriations bill.
World’s leading soil science congress opens in Nanjing for the first time in China
The 23rd World Congress of Soil Science, often regarded as the “Olympics” of the soil science community, opened in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province. Held from June 8 to 12 under the theme “Soil and the Shared Future of Humankind,” the congress marks the first time in its nearly 100-year history that this premier global academic event in soil science has been hosted in China.
Scientists discover giant, fan-shaped structure deep beneath the East Antarctic Ice Sheet
A mysterious geological structure that resembles a human hand with outstretched fingers has been revealed beneath East Antarctica. The discovery shows the frozen continent still hides many geological ...
Scientists discover giant, fan-shaped structure deep beneath the East Antarctic Ice Sheet
A mysterious geological structure that resembles a human hand with outstretched fingers has been revealed beneath East Antarctica. The discovery shows the frozen continent still hides many geological secrets.
Humans prefer to walk anticlockwise, scientists find
From Spain to Japan, experiments have repeatedly shown a left-turn bias, but exact mechanic ‘is still an open question’
Pollinators in peril: scientists reveal the hidden human health costs of the world’s disappearing bees
Crops and flowers rely on them for survival, but wild bees are declining – and crucial nutrients will go missing from our diets as a result
World's First AI‑Designed Vaccine Tested in Humans For The First Time
Protection from threats that haven't even emerged.
Steven Spielberg doesn't want to be the first human to meet aliens: 'I would not be the right person'
Steven Spielberg says that he doesn't want to be the first human to meet alien visitors: 'I would not be the right person.'
A classic brain test exposed AI's biggest weakness
Researchers gave top AI models a classic attention test used in psychology and found a major flaw. While the models could correctly name colors in short lists, their performance deteriorated sharply as the task became longer and more complex. Some leading systems fell from over 90% accuracy to nearly complete failure.
Republican Steve Hilton will advance to November election in California governor’s race, CNN projects
Republican Steve Hilton will advance to the November election in California’s gubernatorial race, CNN’s Decision Desk projects. Hilton, a former Fox News host who has President Donald Trump’s endorsement, will face former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat.
Cooley Dickinson Hospital earns top LGBTQ+ healthcare rating
Cooley Dickinson Hospital has been named an “LGBTQ+ Health Care Equality Leader” for the seventh consecutive time by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.
'Disclosure Day' review: I wish life were like a Steven Spielberg movie
Josh O'Connor and Emily Blunt race to save humanity in this alien thriller.
UT Health San Antonio awarded grant to advance cervical cancer screening
Content provided by Lauren Michalk UT Health San Antonio has been selected as a recipient of the American Cancer Society’s Self-Collected Human Papillomavirus Readiness Pilot (SHaRP) grant, a national initiative designed to help health care organizations prepare for and implement HPV self-collection as part of routine cervical cancer screening. SHaRP supports the integration of human papillomavirus […]
The Ocean's Health Is Deteriorating on Multiple Fronts, U.N. Scientists Warn
A new U.N. report warns of escalating threats to the world's oceans from human impacts.
Some drugs 'fail' because of unrealistic testing conditions, scientists discover
A drug once dismissed as ineffective suddenly worked—when scientists tested it under more realistic conditions that mimic the human body. In this surprising new discovery, Northwestern University scientists ...
UT Health San Antonio awarded American Cancer Society SHaRP grant to advance cervical cancer screening
Contact: Eileen Teves, 210-450-7239, tevese@uthscsa.edu Content provided by Lauren Michalk SAN ANTONIO, June 9, 2026 – UT Health San Antonio has been selected as a recipient of the American Cancer Society’s Self-Collected Human Papillomavirus Readiness Pilot (SHaRP) grant, a national initiative designed to help health care organizations prepare for and implement HPV self-collection as part […]
The first-ever reverse-aging treatment has been injected into a human
Cellular reprogramming is the hottest topic in longevity science, with tech titans like Sam Altman investing in it. It's now being tested in humans.
Sam Altman said automating everything will be 'dangerous'
Sam Altman and Jakub Pachocki said AI is making the roles of applying human judgment more important.
A reporting checklist for large language models in behavioural science
Nature Human Behaviour - Large language models offer new opportunities for behavioural science, but their rapid evolution poses challenges for research rigour. We introduce a consensus-based...
The First AI-Designed Vaccine Was Just Tested on Humans. It Could Change How We Fight Pandemics
An early human trial suggests a new vaccine strategy is safe, but still not proven effective.
Advancing Community Health Requires Whole-Person Care
In my years at the bedside and now as a nurse leader in Northern Michigan, I’ve witnessed healthcare at its most complex and its most human.
Sam Altman's eye-scanning startup lays off staff
Tools for Humanity has struggled to show how its iris-scanning "Orb" can generate revenue. Now it's laying off employees.
We can create the future of science right now
Paul Litvak is the founder and Executive Director of the Robyn Dawes Institute and a Visiting Scholar at UC Berkeley. He has a PhD in Behavioral Decision Research from Carnegie Mellon where he studied emotions and the sunk cost bias. Over 15 years in industry, he solved a wide range of challenging technical problems. At Meta he created models optimizing the ad review process. At Google he ran experiments to measure social influence. At Airbnb, he was a product manager leading machine learning teams optimizing search ranking and price suggestions. He also co-founded and led product at Rhythmic Health, a venture-backed biosensing startup, creating an accurate low cost system using a color changing strip and a smart phone to measure salivary lactate. The bottleneck At this point, it is uncontroversial to say that science needs to stop using the PDF article as the unit of knowledge and currency. The unbearable slowness of scientific publishing, the profit motive and margins: I’m not saying anything new. The PDF also sucks because it’s hard to extract structured information, which makes it hard to do evidence synthesis. As a result, we do much less evidence synthesis than is needed. And evidence synthesis ultimately undergirds most policy and medical decision-making. I can see second-by-second real-time odds for any sporting or newsworthy event, but a school board can’t see the best evidence on whether their 8th graders should be taught algebra. As a society, we don’t treat this as an important problem. Again, not controversial. Not only is the problem well understood, but the solution has already been laid out. What we need is AI-assisted living evidence synthesis - (1) an open knowledge graph of atomic claims, (2) claims linked to evidence, (3) assessment and synthesis of each piece of evidence, and (4) continuous updating with new data. What few realize (yet) is that the technical capacity to build this vision for a significant portion of science already exists. Not only that, scientists and startup teams are already building many of these components. I know this because I’ve been surveying the space and talking to many of the builders. There are some missing pieces: for example, evaluations of how well some of the components work. But at this point, most of what’s missing is a fully end-to-end working integration of all of these parts. In the rest of this essay, I’m going to lay out all the parts of a working living evidence layer for science and who is working on them, and propose concrete next steps for building this system. What’s now possible The diagram above outlines the components of a living evidence synthesis platform, including some of the teams working on each component1. Scientific PDFs are processed into claims with associated evidence. The evidence is subjected to a forensic audit, methodological evaluation and robustness and reproducibility checks. Finally it’s given a weight in a continuously updating synthesis. What follows is a description and status of each component and a few of the teams working on them. Document understanding The first thing you need to be able to do is turn an article into structured data. Mostly that means parsing PDFs. There are often multicolumn layouts that confuse non-specialized PDF to text processing libraries. For scientific papers, there is the added complexity of parsing formulas and tables and figures. This is a really hot area - there are startups offering APIs, and it seems like a new open source package gets posted to Github every few weeks. What follows isn’t exhaustive. A package called GROBID was the state of the art for a while, they didn’t update their package for nearly two years until very recently. In the meantime reducto.ai released an AI powered PDF extraction API, PaddleOCR became popular, IBM released a model called Docling, and both Mistral and Gemini created models and libraries. I also know of at least one other well-funded psychology research group working on a paper parser. By contrast, there are few open evals in this space, with no extensive evals for complex table comprehension in particular. Nonetheless, I’m confident this will be a solved problem soon, given the combination of LLM advances and developer interest. Hypothesis level extraction There has been increasing interest in comprehending the extracted text of papers and linking information to evidence for each hypothesis. A lot of work has already been done. Trialstreamer (Marshall et al. 2020) and RobotReviewer LIVE (Marshall et al. 2023) demonstrated automated extraction of trial population, intervention, and outcome at scale on clinical RCTs. PaperQA2 (Skarlinski et al. 2024) and Ai2 ScholarQA (2024) extended this to retrieval-augmented question answering with citation grounding. Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace operationalized claim-level extraction for end users. OpenEval (Booeshaghi et al. 2026) is the most recent and most ambitious: 1.96 million atomic claims extracted from 16,087 eLife manuscripts using Claude Sonnet 4.5, grouped into ~299,000 results, with LLM evaluations showing 81% agreement with human peer review on a 2,487-paper subset. None of these solutions link claims to test-statistics, as you would need to evaluate randomized controlled trials. This is why I built the evidence.guide API - to extract hypotheses and associated test statistics from behavioral science papers. The best public eval of this kind of extraction I’m aware of comes from the recent SCORE project - they had humans code thousands of psychology papers to extract their claims by hand. It would be extremely helpful to the world if all scientific PDFs were available as structured open data. I’ve been working to make this happen, both directly at Berkeley and through coordination with large entities I can’t yet speak of; as hard as it is to do, I think it’s possible2. Forensic audit A lot of work has been done on forensic audit, but some gaps remain. Of course, for biology papers that rely on images for evidence, there are a variety of tools (notably Proofig and ImageTwin) to spot anomalies. These are still well short of what sleuths like Elizabeth Bik can do on her own, but these tools are constant companions among fraud analysts. There’s someone working on auditing Excel files for anomalies, and a number of teams are automating numerical checks like GRIM and SPRITE, including Scrutiny project, the INSPECT-SR team as well as statcheck. The regcheck team is building a way to use AI to compare preregistrations to analyses in papers, to ensure there aren’t significant deviations. Nonetheless, there are many other kinds of anomalies to screen for, both public and less publicly known. And there are no formal evals for anomaly detection that I’m aware of. Still, there’s a lot to draw from in this space and I’m pretty certain we will be able to scan papers for most kinds of obvious anomalies in the near future. Methodological review This area has been white hot, though I fear for many of the startups in this space, because this capability may become commoditized. There are at least six different AI peer review companies, including Refine.ink, Reviewer3, ReviewerZero.ai, Q.E.D. Science, Paper Wizard, and Isitcredible. Coarse (a pun on refine) was also recently created as an open source alternative. These systems provide qualitative feedback on the content of papers, spotting methodological weaknesses and mathematical errors. They seem to work pretty well, and many academics report bitterly that they exceed the average quality of typical peer reviewers. But there are few evals here either. What evals exist so far involve using LLM-as-judge (circularity problems abound) or comparing against human reviews of questionable quality. What you’d ideally want is an eval that measures capturing known errors in papers3. Reproducibility and robustness Another active area has been using AI agents to automate computational reproducibility4 and robustness5 checks in papers that report numerical results. For more recent papers where data and code are available, AI agents can see whether they can re-run the analyses and produce the numbers reported in the published paper. In addition to a handful of individual academics who have been experimenting using Claude Code for this, the Institute for Replication is a leading group working on building an end to end system. The evals related to this problem are the most mature, with CORE-Bench (Siegel, Kapoor, Narayanan 2024) and PaperBench (OpenAI 2025) available to benchmark agents on this task. There is also work on getting AI agents to test alternative ways of analyzing the data to ensure the results are robust to small analytic design choices. Synthesis This is the most underdeveloped area where significant investment is required. Although some automated evidence synthesis systems exist — for example, otto-sr is building an AI agent to write systematic reviews — none of these incorporate the full range of paper level signals to weight evidence appropriately. Nor is there anything like an eval or a gold standard for a good systematic review. Arguably Cochrane reviews are the closest we have to gold standard human systematic reviews, though I’ve heard academics in the know complain about their uneven quality. A key question for a synthesis platform is how to weight anomalies and methodological issues in assessing the quality of a piece of evidence. This is an unsolved problem and one I’m very keen to work on. Continuous updating There are many pieces of basic infrastructure available for monitoring for new research and initiating updates. OpenAlex is the current open citation graph. Retraction Watch integrated into Crossref in October 2023. Scite tracks how citations support, contrast, or mention prior claims. The Living Evidence Network demonstrated continuous-update workflows in clinical guidelines. Engineering this is a relatively straightforward task. When you look over this technical architecture and all the progress being made, it’s hard not to be optimistic that a living guide to scientific evidence will be built. The stakeholders are ready The social infrastructure for this is starting to coalesce — it’s not just a pie in the sky academic exercise to imagine this coming into existence. Institutions like the Center for Open Science, the Institute for Replication, the INSPECT-SR, the Living Evidence Network and more are all working on scaling work to improve research quality. Funders are also aligned. The Sloan Foundation has funded living evidence work through COS. Coefficient Giving supports the Institute for Replication and COS. The Astera Institute and the Institute for Progress have shown interest in this space. NIH has established an Office for Replication and Reproducibility. Although there are (very unfortunately) serious headwinds in science funding generally, there is an active group of funders interested in metascience. A brief word about what I’ve been doing at RDI. First, as a Visiting Scholar at Berkeley I’ve been actively figuring out how a non-profit and a public university can conduct and make public the results of large-scale academic article data mining. With some of the money I raised from donors, I commissioned a legal analysis of recent case law and publisher text data mining (TDM) agreements in order to understand whether a massive open data mining of academic articles is possible (with caveats, it is). I’ve also been working to bring together stakeholders in this space, and identify gaps. I’ve also been doing some software development in this space, with more to come. A pilot proposal The assumption undergirding all of this is that an AI, given all this information, would make the right judgment about a scientific claim with lots of conflicting evidence, weighing all the factors appropriately. That’s the hypothesis we need to test. Randomized control trial research is the best place to focus on first. RCTs are used to make many of the important decisions in society - from medical trials to public policy changes. And they use a relatively uniform set of inferential statistics with lots of known and available diagnostics. Behavioral science experiments, within the broader realm of RCTs, should be first used as a testbed whose results can be generalized. Because behavioral science is at the vanguard of open science practices, replications abound (there are thousands of them) to serve as ground truth training data. Key Hypothesis Therefore the pilot would test, in behavioral RCTs that have been replicated, whether the quality of evidence for a claim can be used to accurately predict whether that claim will replicate. Secondary Hypotheses Compared to claims that replicated, non-replicated claims demonstrate a greater share of forensic anomalies in their source literatures. Hypothesis level claim and statistic extraction is accurate enough to scale living evidence without onerous human review costs. Replication prediction is more accurate than prediction markets6 or journal prestige. If all the different quality signals we gather do accurately predict which studies will replicate, then we can use that model to score evidence to power the living evidence layer. Why this is informative regardless of outcome If the pilot succeeds, the architecture extends to medical RCTs (where Living Evidence already operates and integration is mostly about claim representation), then to slices of basic biology with stable replication structure. If it fails, the field learns which quality signals are load-bearing and which ones metascience has oversold. Either result is a contribution to knowing what the literature supports. Implications for funders Because this burgeoning ecosystem of builders already exists, a well-informed philanthropic or government funder could play a crucial catalyzing role in bringing this future about. They could play at least three roles: creating open structured datasets, publishing open benchmarks and incentivizing the solving of key technical challenges. First, open archives of papers that the government maintains, like PubMed, could be turned into structured data amenable to large scale metascience and claim aggregation. I know the US government already has an interest in doing this, though some key open questions remain unanswered. How do you determine the best models and systems for accurately extracting information from papers? How can you establish a robust way to allow researchers to flag errors and correct them? And finally, how do you create a legal regime in working with publishers to maximize the scope of available papers? For the latter, a university or a private philanthropy may be better positioned to make structured data publicly available under journal subscription terms or fair use. Philanthropists or government funders could also coordinate to create or commission benchmarks that evaluate whether important problems have been solved. For example, an open benchmark for claim extraction from a range of different scientific article types would be extremely helpful. Ensuring the underlying data are accurate is vital for creating these evaluations. I’ve discussed opportunistically using various human-created datasets for this purpose, but a consistent problem is that errors in human data make it difficult for them to serve as a gold standard. Finally, with structured data and benchmarks available, the government or private philanthropy could use them to incentivize groups to develop machine learning systems that meet these benchmarks. Prizes are one potentially valuable tool for this. For example, you could establish a prize for a system that accurately updates a living meta-analysis for a small set of claims. Prizes are particularly useful as signals of problem importance, and can help create vibrant ecosystems of public and private research—see, for example the role the government played in kickstarting the current work on nuclear fusion. Conclusion The drawbacks of the current scientific publishing system are known. Scientists agree, metascientists agree, philanthropists agree: the published PDF plus citation graph isn’t the right substrate for maintaining a representation of the evidence base in science. The pieces needed to build the alternative either already exist or are rapidly taking shape. The community is forming around exactly this problem, with concrete partnerships and shared infrastructure. A pilot should start on behavioral science RCTs because that’s the slice of empirical science most amenable to legibility, where replication ground truth is richest, and where the failure modes are best documented. What’s been missing is the galvanizing mission to assemble these pieces into something that works. That’s what I’m proposing to build. *** 1 I have a broader field map that I’ll release publicly soon. This is me, building in public! 2 If this is something that you are excited about, please reach out and talk to me. 3 More on this very soon too! 4 This tests whether, given the code and the data, you can get the same statistics as reported in the published paper. 5 This tests whether the results are the same as a paper’s given alternative analytical decisions in conducting the analysis (like outlier omission). Closely related is the idea of a “multiverse” where you come up with many different ways of answering the same underlying research question with the same data, and test whether the results hold in all those alternative methods. There’s been work on the latter as well. 6 Some of the replications, e.g. those from the SCORE project, had paired the experiments with forecasts from prediction markets. So we get to look at this for free.
Testing AI against public health's existing tools shows mixed results
A new Penn-led randomized controlled trial has found that AI-powered chatbots can make vaccine-hesitant parents more likely to say they will immunize their children against human papillomavirus (HPV), ...
Mosquito bite prevention remains best defense against West Nile virus | Health and Human Services North Dakota
North Dakota Health and Human Services (HHS) reminds people that preventing mosquito bites is the most effective way to avoid West Nile virus. Although no human cases of West Nile virus have been reported to HHS so far this year, there is a risk of contracting the disease anytime mosquitoes are active.
Materials lab in national program to develop wearable eye health system
The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health, an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has awarded up to $75.8 million to four research teams through its Ocular Laboratory for Analysis of Biomarkers program. Researchers from Penn State will develop biosensors for the Closed-Loop Sensing and Microdosing for Dry Eye and Systemic Disease Management (COSMIC) team led by Lacristat, a California-based ophthalmology company.
We Need to Know More About How AI is Affecting Mental Health
The public, mental health practitioners, and policymakers don’t know enough about the impacts of AI use on the human psyche, writes Chris Mills Rodrigo.
Huntsville business owner Natalia Infante brings human intuition to national brands through Hola Insights
Huntsville may be known for rockets, defense, and technology, but Natalia Infante, Ph.D., owner and founder of Hola Insights, a market research and insights agency, is proving the Rocket City is also a place where nationally recognized research firms can thrive. Infante recently sat down with the Huntsville Business Journal to share how her multicultural […]
Exclusive: Political pressure threatens to undercut EPA science evaluating chemical safety for consumers, sources say
Inside the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency, scientists say they’re under pressure to alter safety reviews of chemicals commonly found in consumer products like household cleaners and cosmetics to make risks to human health and the environment disappear on paper.
Exclusive: Political pressure threatens to undercut EPA science evaluating chemical safety for consumers, sources say
Inside the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency, scientists say they’re under pressure to alter safety reviews of chemicals commonly found in consumer products like household cleaners and cosmetics to make risks to human health and the environment disappear on paper.
Smartphones broke dating. AI might finish the job.
Humanity may scroll its way out of existence.
Our evolutionary path to parenting—and sharing the load
"The Creatures' Guide to Caring" explores how communal child-rearing allowed animals from wasps to humans to evolve and thrive.
Bots Now Outnumber Humans Online. Here's What It Means for Your Business
Here's how some companies are starting to optimize their websites for AI agents.
Digging Back in Time in the UAE
Once below a shallow sea, Jabal al Fāyah now stands above the desert in the United Arab Emirates as a reminder of a watery past and early human survival.
The Science Behind Why Your Pet Is Starting to Look… Human
From pugs to Persian cats, human aesthetic preferences are driving a new wave of convergent evolution.
Inside Intel's AI chip factory where humans are the greatest threat
I visited Intel's massive chip factory in Oregon, where robots outnumber people and a single human hair or skin particle can cause costly damage.
Inside California Politics: Hilton continues his pitch to voters
Editor’s Note: This episode of Inside California Politics was recorded Friday afternoon before the Associated Press projected former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra would b…
One UVM lab’s surprise discovery led to flu science breakthrough
Proteins in the two most common types of flu virus enable them to take very different paths to entering human lungs, a finding that could lead to more directed antiviral treatments.
The Gods of Entertainment
When, exactly, did entertainment become a fundamental human right?
Scientists finally complete Schrödinger’s 100-year-old color theory
Researchers have finally resolved a key problem in a 100-year-old theory of color, showing that the qualities we perceive in colors are intrinsic to the mathematics of color space itself. The discovery sharpens our understanding of human vision and could lead to more precise color technologies and visualizations.
Construction causes power outage at PitCo Health and Human Services
Construction work hit a buried power line at 3 p.m. on Thursday that supplied grid and backup generator power to the Pitkin County Health and Human Services building, leading to necessary repairs that will last through the weekend and into next week.
WEEKEND READ: Confronting rare challenges through science, regulation
A family in Travis County is racing to save their baby from an ultra-rare genetic disease, while two New World screwworm cases have been confirmed in Texas, and the legality of owning human bones.
Scientists sound the alarm as dangerous amoebas spread globally
Scientists warn that free-living amoebae may be an underappreciated public health threat, capable of causing deadly infections and shielding other dangerous microbes from water treatment. Climate change and aging infrastructure could help these resilient organisms spread more widely in the years ahead.
Democrat Xavier Becerra will advance in California governor’s race, CNN projects
Former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, will advance to the general election in California’s governor’s race, CNN’s Decision Desk projects. It’s not yet clear who he’ll face in November.
HHS Restructuring and New Enforcement Signal Increased Focus on Privacy, Security, and Health Plans
On May 18, 2026, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the restructuring of its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforcement efforts, establishing a dedicated unit for privacy and security enforcement under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The move, combined with a recent enforcement action over a ransomware attack, highlights the agency’s new enforcement focus on health plans and the employers that sponsor them.
A bonobo’s make-believe tea party has scientists rethinking whether imagination belongs only to humans
Kanzi the bonobo's responses in a pretend tea-party experiment have scientists reconsidering how uniquely human imagination really is.
Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services issues health alert for Rockford Lake
Nebraska has issued a health alert for Harmful Algal Blooms, also known as toxic blue-green algae, at Rockford Lake in Gage County on Friday.
What scientists just uncovered about Neanderthals rewrites everything we thought we knew - Futura-Sciences
How did Neanderthals appear—and disappear? “How did Neanderthals appear? And how did they disappear?” To this day, these remain two of the big, unanswered mysteries in human evolution. For both questions, scientists have long suspected that a drop in genetic diversity may have played a role. Thanks to the study...
Satya Nadella says AI agents should be treated like human employees
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella says companies should manage AI agents like employees, giving them identities and permissions.
Buckeye engineers team up with US Soccer to advance recovery science
The Ohio State University is partnering with the U.S. Soccer Federation to push the frontiers of recovery science — the quickly evolving discipline focused on restoring athletes’ readiness between training, competition and injury. Through the university’s Human Performance Collaborative (HPC), the partnership is translating laboratory scie...
Entertainment Veteran’s Venture Fund Unveils First AI Bets
Hallstone Ventures' initial portfolio includes investments in cinema-grade robots and human authentication tech
One Health in a Fractured World: Why Global Health Governance Must Adapt to Geopolitical Fragmentation - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Introduction In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic revealed the weaknesses of global health systems to infectious diseases. However, less recognized was how the emergence of this novel virus highlighted the global changes converging to heighten outbreak risks: increased human-animal contact and agricultural intensification, accelerated population growth and urbanization, and changing weather and climatic patterns. These […]
Vanderbilt Health Pets of the Day: Freddy and Cooper
Today’s first Dog of the Day is Freddy, submitted by Beth Piazza of the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center. “Freddy was adopted on Valentine’s Day of 2024 from the Nashville Humane Association. He is the cuddliest 90-pound lap dog.“ Today’s second Dog of the Day is Cooper, submitted by Brandie Taylor of Medicine. “Cooper is a 14 year old chocolate lab. He loves eating and going to get pup cups!” Freddy and Cooper were featured in the June 9, 2026, edition of MyVUMC News. To see the archived collection of Vanderbilt Health Pets of the Day, go to: https://news.vumc.org/section/voice/pets-vumc/. Pet photos wanted! The Vanderbilt Health Pets of the Day are posted to the Voice section of Vanderbilt Health News and included in regular editions of the MyVUMC News newsletter, which is published twice a week by Vanderbilt Health News and Communications. Now through July 6, we especially want to see photos of your pets enjoying spring and summer. That might be having fun at the lake or beach, hanging out in the backyard, lying on the couch, or in the case of a pet fish, just living the life aquatic (we’re not too strict about what constitutes enjoying spring and summer). If you have a pet picture you would like to send in for consideration, go to the submission form here and follow the guidelines.
Trump administration’s proposed rule would limit some immigrants’ ability to legally work in the U.S.
The proposal would make it harder for several categories of immigrants -- notably those in the U.S. on humanitarian parole as well as DACA recipients -- to obtain or renew legal work authorization.
Scotland’s ancient human-made islands are dripping with secrets
Crannogs may have been built by the country's early inhabitants some 4,000 years ago.
AI-designed universal coronavirus vaccine passes first human trial
Scientists have successfully tested an AI-designed universal coronavirus vaccine in humans for the first time, finding it to be safe and well tolerated. The vaccine generated immune responses against multiple coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, SARS, and related bat viruses with pandemic potential. By targeting features shared across an entire virus family, it aims to provide protection even as viruses evolve.
Scientists are teaching AI-powered robots to run lab experiments
Scientists are building autonomous robotic labs powered by artificial intelligence. The goal, they say, is for these robots to take over human researchers' most laborious, time-consuming tasks.
Texas health officials warn of New World Screwworm after confirmed case in Zavala County
Texas health officials urge precautions after confirming a New World Screwworm case in a South Texas calf, warning of risks to animals and rare human infections.
Building a One Health workforce to protect people from zoonotic disease and foodborne illness
From zoonotic pathogens that move between animals, humans and their shared environment to antimicrobial resistance (AMR), driven by antimicrobial use across sectors, to chemical contaminants, food safety is at the centre of the One Health approach. On World Food Safety Day, we highlight those using the approach to address risks to human, animal and environmental health. WHO, together with partners, is committed to strengthening the One Health workforce, including professions such as veterinarians, epidemiologists and food safety officers. However, the approach is only as strong as the systems behind it and the people who implement it – across sectors, services and borders.
In a First, Scientists Precisely Edit Human Embryo Genes
Researchers relied on a newer gene-editing technique that may make it possible to engineer embryos, a prospect that has long alarmed bioethicists.
RFK Jr.'s health department is seeking Americans' medical records. Here's what's going on
The Health and Human Services Department wants to access medical records, but it's not tied to reports of autism research, the department says.
MDHHS Finalizes Specialty Behavioral Health Services Location Policy
The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) recently finalized Medicaid Policy Bulletin MMP 26-17, effective July 1, 2026, which clarifies reimbursement requirements for specialty behavioral health services provided through Prepaid Inpatient Health Plans in home, community and residential settings.
Attacks on Health Care in the occupied Palestinian territory (13-26 May 2026)
Situation Report in English on occupied Palestinian territory about Health, Protection and Human Rights and more; published on 4 Jun 2026 by Insecurity Insight
The Politics of Affect in Literary Translation
The Politics of Affect in Literary Translation Edited by Sofía Monzón (Utah State University) and Lucie Spezzatti (University of Geneva) Scholarship on affect, emotion, embodiment, and feeling has significantly reshaped debates across the humanities and...
Will AI Replace Magic? The Bigger Threat May Be the Audience
AI may not master sleight of hand anytime soon, but it could weaken the human desire to gather, watch, and wonder together
Weekly Entertainment Report, June 4-7: Live music and lively arts in Southern NH » Nashua Ink Link
Music and lively arts remains at the core of the human experience. Celebrate humanity this weekend!
Rabies Makes Its Return to Wyoming - Wyoming Department of Health
As summer approaches and temperatures rise, the Wyoming Department of Health (WDH) is warning residents about wild animals that may carry rabies. The most common carriers of rabies in our state are bats and skunks, but any mammal can be infected with rabies, including humans. The first confirmed case of rabies for 2026 occurred […]
Human Research, Biotechnology for Advanced Health Fill Station Research Schedule
Wednesday’s science schedule aboard the International Space Station encompassed human research, microbial analysis, and 3D bioprinting to advance health on and off the Earth. The Expedition 74 crew members also worked on spacesuit maintenance and cargo spacecraft duties throughout the day rounding out their shift.
Alsobrooks, public health advocates warn of a 'leadership vacuum' at HHS under RFK Jr.
US Sen. Angela Alsobrooks calls again for removal of US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as deadly outbreaks of hantavirus and Ebola pose international public health threats
Ultrahuman says hackers accessed customers' wellness data via internal tool
The breach at wearable ring makaer Ultrahuman stemmed from credentials stolen from a malware-infected employee laptop.
'The Super Mario Galaxy Movie' Remains Atop U.K. Home Entertainment Sales Chart Through June 3
Universal’s The Super Mario Galaxy Movie remained No. 1 on the weekly Official Film Chart — the U.K. home entertainment sales chart — through June 3 due to digital transactions. Amazon MGM Studios’ former chart topper Project Hail Mary, starring Ryan Gosling as a lone astronaut on a mission to save humanity, remained at No. … Continue reading "‘The Super Mario Galaxy Movie’ Remains Atop U.K. Home Entertainment Sales Chart Through June 3"
Why ocean science is still one of the worst-funded scientific fields worldwide
For a planet that is 71% ocean, humanity spends a surprisingly small amount of time (and money) trying to understand it. Ocean science sits in a strange place in the research ecosystem. It underpin…
Leading Global Brain Science Conference OHBM 2028 to Be Held in Yokohama
YOKOHAMA, Japan, June 03, 2026--The 2028 Annual Meeting of the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM 2028) will be held in Yokohama, Japan.
GOP candidate Charles to work with Trump on fraud allegations
Late last year, the Maine Department of Health and Human Services referred one Portland-area social service provider to the attorney general’s office for investigation after finding “a credible allegation of fraud.”
Algal blooms explained: How scientists are helping spot them sooner
Algal blooms can seem to appear overnight. A stretch of ocean that looked clear days earlier can suddenly appear discolored and sometimes pose risks to ecosystems and human health. But scientists say ...
Explore the science behind optical illusions at Orlando Science Center
Prepare to have your mind blown and your senses boggled with a dazzling new exhibit at Orlando Science Center. In "Phenomena: The Exhibition," visitors will gain a deeper understanding of the science behind illusions and the mechanisms that govern human perception. An interactive journey with over 20 stunning and immersive illusions, "Phenomena: The Exhibition" will
The cult of objectivity has broken consciousness science
With 22 competing theories and no consensus in sight, the science of consciousness is lost. In this exclusive IAI interview, Berkeley psychedelics researcher and bestselling author of a new book on consciousness Michael Pollan insists that even though consciousness lies beyond traditional forms of scientific investigation, we should resist becoming dualists who see it as something radically different from ordinary stuff in the world. Instead, he makes the case for reimagining science itself: it must stop reaching for objective descriptions of physical reality, and instead embrace subjectivity as the indispensable core of all inquiry. Alasdair Craig: How did your experiences with psychedelics get you interested in consciousness?Michael Pollan: One of the things that happens on psychedelics is that they foreground consciousness. What formerly seemed perfectly transparent and ever present—and yet, non-existent, as water is to fish—suddenly you see it. The metaphor I use in the book is that psychedelics sponge the windscreen. Suddenly you realize: wow, there’s a windscreen, there is this phenomenon that’s mediating my relationship to reality. This is not an unusual realization on psychedelics. I think a lot of people are called to think about consciousness after psychedelic experiences. So that was the proximate inspiration for A World Appears: A Journey Into Consciousness (2026).And then there was a more specific way in which psychedelics influence the book. That was a particular experience I had on psilocybin. I had the sensation that the plants in my garden were conscious and returning my gaze, with their own point of view and agency, and I got curious as to how to evaluate an insight like that. I mean, what’s the truth quotient of insights you have on psychedelics? And I was reading William James—who, of course, wrote beautifully about mystical experience—and he said, we can’t judge the metaphysics here, but we should pay attention to two criteria: (1) How useful is it to think this is true? He was a pragmatist, of course. And (2) can we subject it to other ways of knowing to validate it? Because maybe we should treat these insights as hypotheses. And that’s kind of how I approach psychedelics, as a great generator of hypotheses, but they need to be tested against other ways of knowing. And so that led me down this long path exploring the science of plant intelligence and plant sentience.AC: I love your phrase, “smudging the windowpane of conscious experience.” So do you now start to think, actually, even when I’m not on psychedelics, I’m just seeing a screen all the time, which is not reality, but rather is my conscious experience, behind which reality is hidden?MP: Well, you know, not when I’m brushing my teeth and making breakfast! But yes, in meditation, certainly. I mean, one of the things you realize is that my experience happens to be this way now, but it could be another way. And many things can affect it. My morning coffee changes the screen in various ways, sharpens certain things.___The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness.___There’s this wonderful metaphor in Aldous Huxley’s book, The Doors of Perception, where he thinks we channel consciousness, and that what the brain does is edit it, and there’s a reducing valve. And psychedelics open the reducing valve wider. I don’t know that I’m ready to buy into the idea that consciousness exists outside brains, but I do love that metaphor because there are times when you are more conscious than others. I know I’ve switched from window pane to valve, but you know, a camera aperture can open wider or narrower. And I do have a sense of that. I have a sense of when I’m being less conscious, and when I’m being more conscious, by which I mean, you know, more present, taking in more sensory information. So when you start thinking about consciousness as a matter of degree, that changes things also.I think when we scroll on social media, obviously, we’re conscious. But minimally so, because we don’t have to generate our own thoughts. We’re basically taking these little hits from other people and thinking their thoughts.The process of writing this book made me kind of relativize everyday consciousness as just one type, which is exactly what William James said. Normal consciousness is one type, separated by the flimsiest of screens from the other types.AC: If we stick with the metaphor of the smudge on the window that you get when you take psychedelics, it seems like we’re saying that consciousness has become like an object that you’re looking at, right? You’re looking at the smudge and that just is consciousness. But sometimes we’ll talk about consciousness as a state that you’re in, rather than an object you can perceive. You’re either conscious or you’re not conscious. So it’s difficult to really know what sort of thing we’re talking about when we talk about consciousness, right?MP: Yeah. When you say that consciousness is an object, what’s the subject? Consciousness also? The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness. So we’re in a closed loop and when we get a perspective on consciousness, we’re not achieving any distance from it. That’s one of the problems with studying consciousness. Science is predicated on an objective, God’s eye view of things, and you never get that. There’s no such thing. SUGGESTED VIEWING The brain filters consciousness With Àlex Gómez-Marín But, yeah, there is this sense, I think, that consciousness is something you can approach. Certainly, when you’re writing and trying to recreate a conscious experience, it’s a fiction, but you’re standing back from it, and looking at it. But there’s no real subject-object distinction.AC: That’s so interesting, because when philosophers start talking about consciousness, they often talk about what they call “qualia”, which is their word for the felt experience of, say, the color red. And I think that way of speaking often makes us think of the qualia as an object, which you can see out there: the redness of red. But, as you say, we also want to collapse the subject-object distinction when we talk about consciousness. So there’s something strange going on here…MP: Oh, yeah, there are many strange things going on! *AC: Let’s talk about the varieties of consciousness. Apart from perceptions, there are, pains, emotions, thoughts, and so on. What is it that holds all this diversity together so that they all count as instances of consciousness? What is it that they all have in common?MP: Yeah, that’s a really good question. I mean, there is sensory information, right? Which we perceive coming from the world outside ourselves. And then there’s internal information, which is what’s called interoception. And this is very important too. This is where feelings come from—what are sometimes called homeostatic feelings—that are intended to get the brain to keep us in these narrow ranges of temperature and glucose and so on. That’s a very important part of consciousness. And according to some researchers, who I think are probably right, this is where consciousness begins, with these very primal feelings, like hunger and thirst and warmth and itch, and things like that. And then there’s this third thing, which is our thinking about thinking.And what holds all this together is, I think, the sense of self. Consciousness generates a self: it is probably an organizing principle. All this stuff is happening to the self. It’s a construct, I think, but it is very useful. It can connect all these different streams of consciousness to a single being or a place, metaphorically speaking.* AC: The first half of your book is about the science of consciousness. Is consciousness just another thing, like black holes or the origin of life, which we don’t yet understand, but which we should have every hope that science will one day get to the bottom of, or is there something special about consciousness that makes this unlikely?MP: It depends how you define science. As we define science now, it’s going be very difficult. Science since Galileo has had a set of rules or assumptions, which is that the proper remit of science is to deal with the objective, quantifiable, third-person world. And the physical sciences have done amazing work under that set of limitations. Galileo—for tactical reasons, not for philosophical reasons—said science should not deal with the soul, which at the time was what consciousness was considered to be. So what is subjective, what is qualitative, what is first person, we’re going to leave to the church, he said. And this was a good agreement, and it probably kept many scientists from getting burned at the stake. But it leaves science in an awkward spot, now that it wants to venture into that territory of qualities, of first-person experience. And I don’t think it has the proper tools. I think it will have to add to its toolkit in some way, and find a way to bring in phenomenology, or lived experience and introspection, which science is usually dismissive of.The challenge—we alluded to it earlier—is that the only tool you have to study consciousness with is consciousness. And what I mean by that is, the whole scientific enterprise is a manifestation of consciousness. As much as scientists like to flatter themselves with this idea that they attain a godlike perspective on what they study, when it comes to consciousness, there’s no such thing. And it’s fine for all the things you can step outside of and study from that perspective. But two areas it won’t work are consciousness and cosmology.___It could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.___With cosmology, too, you have to study the universe from inside the universe. It’s not that cosmologists haven’t made progress. We know a lot about the age of the universe and expansion and things like that. But we can’t penetrate what happened before the Big Bang. We just don’t have the tools because we can’t stand outside.The fact that there are 22 full-scale theories of consciousness tells you all you need to know: we’re kind of lost. And I was surprised to find that we are more lost than I thought we were when I started this. I thought that there’d be leading theories, or that we had experiments that we could conduct that would nail some of this down. And the fact is, we don’t.So, I don’t know if science can solve it. But, of course, we can change the rules of science. A really influential book for me was a book called The Blind Spot, by two physicists, Marcello Gleiser and Adam Frank, and a philosopher, Evan Thompson. It’s a reminder that science is a social practice. It’s organized in a certain way and it can be organized in a different way. But it has this huge blind spot at the center of it, which is its failure to recognize that it is a form of consciousness itself, and it doesn’t have a good way of taking account of lived experience.AC: On the one hand, I think you want to resist traditional dualism, which would say that consciousness is something magical, something supernatural, right? But on the other hand, you’re accepting that there is this division in reality between the stuff that you can investigate objectively and measure, and so on—the stuff that science has been good at finding out about—and consciousness, which, for some reason, you can’t objectively measure. Some would take this to suggest that the dualism is actually right. Is there a way of reconciling these two strands of your thinking?MP: To call it magical is full of value judgement. I mean, you could just say immaterial. The interesting thing is, I think, that intuitively we’re all dualists. And I don’t know whether that’s because we’re children of Descartes and other cultures are less dualist than we are. Or it may be because that’s how consciousness feels. It feels different than the body. It feels separate from the body. But I don’t think we should trust that intuition.AC: So let’s think about ways that science might be changed to get at consciousness. I suppose the starting point would be the way that you begin the second half of your book. You have this nice line from William James, where he says, “We now begin our study of the mind from within.” Could you give us some sense of the ways of studying the mind from within? What does this involve?MP: I don’t know what that science looks like. But one of the points I’m making is that it depends on the humanities. I found that I learned as much, if not more, about consciousness, from reading novels and poetry. There is a sense of the fullness and complexity of consciousness that you don’t get in any scientific account. I interviewed this stream-of-consciousness writer and I approached her as an expert on consciousness, and she is. So I think that dialogue is really important.I’m reading Ben Lerner’s new novel, Transcription. Just read the first page of this novel: it’s a man falling asleep on a train, going to conduct an interview, and there is the experience of being in the train, facing backwards, there’s the view outside, but there’s a reflection of himself through which he’s seeing outside. There’s the memory of dropping his kids off at school. All this is going on in one moment of consciousness. Scientists aren’t going anywhere near that. But I think it’s useful for them to think about. That’s where we’re trying to go: like, how does such a layered experience happen? You know, it also makes you wonder, could a computer ever do this? And it gives you some doubt.*AC: Before we get to computers, perhaps we could talk briefly about plants. How did you come to feel that they are sentient?MP: Well, it was a psychedelic experience, and it’s not unusual on psychedelics. In fact, there’ve been studies about how people become animists during psychedelic experience. Their belief in animism arises after a single psychedelic experience.You know, most scientists would say this is all a myth. But we have only 400 years of the age of enlightenment and science. Before that, we were animists, and if you go around the world, most indigenous cultures are still animists, and children are animists, by and large, until they go to school. So it could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.As I said, I wanted to test this idea, and see whether there was conventional scientific evidence for it. And there’s fascinating work going on in a field that calls itself—in a rather cheeky way—plant neurobiology. These are people who fully realize there are no neurons in plants, but they’re trolling conventional botanists! And they’re doing experiments that are demonstrating that plants can learn and remember, which is kind of amazing: how do you store a memory without neurons? They’re finding plants that can solve problems, that can hear and see. In fact, they have 20 senses to our five or six. For example, a bean plant looking for something to twine, and given a pole within eight inches or so of it, knows where that pole is and will aim its spiraling reach at that pole. What is that about? Is it bouncing signals off of it?One of the spookiest things is the fact that the same anesthetics that put us out put plants out. You might think that plants are already out, but they’re not. They’re just slow. If you take a plant with a fast behavior, like a Venus flytrap, and give it an anesthetic, it will stop reacting. So you have to ask yourself, what is lost when the plant is anaesthetized? Some state of alertness, of awareness, of its environment, of reactivity. I’m not prepared to call that consciousness, but maybe it’s sentience—which is a simpler form of consciousness, and involves the ability to sense what’s going on in your environment and assess what’s good and bad for you and act appropriately. That may be a universal quality of life.AC: Let’s turn from plants to AI. You point out that LLMs are trained on the internet rather than direct interactions with reality. You put this really nicely when you say the internet is not the world so much as a shadow cast by the world. So LLMs are living in this kind of shadow world, or in Plato’s cave, as you put it. What’s the significance of this for AI consciousness and moral consideration? And, to recall the beginning of our conversation, if we’re stuck behind a veil or screen of consciousness, are we also stuck in a kind of shadow world?MP: I don’t think they’re the same shadow worlds because our world includes nature and other people. And even if it’s mediated in some ways... There is a reality out there, and we are in relation to it, through consciousness. There’s friction with it. What’s missing from the LLMs is that friction with the real world. There’s more to the world than human representation, which is what they’re dealing with. And that means that so far, AI is a cultural technology for combining thoughts we’ve already had. SUGGESTED VIEWING Cracking the code for thought With Roger Penrose, Sabrina Gonzalez Pasterski, Max Tegmark, Güneş Taylor Genuine creativity is more than collage. A lot of what AI does now is tantamount to collage, putting this with that and you know, that’s part of art, certainly. But there are also genuinely new ideas that come into the world that don’t come in through manipulating the representations we already have. So it remains to be seen whether AIs can be truly creative in that more radical sense.But my arguments against AI becoming conscious have to do with the fact that the idea of AI consciousness is based on this faulty metaphor that the brain is a computer. There are dimensions in which the brain is like a computer—it certainly does its share of computation. But computers have this sharp distinction between hardware and software, and brains don’t. In a brain, hardware and software are identical. Every memory is a physical change to the brain. Brains are not interchangeable in the way computers are. So this idea that you could take the consciousness out and somehow run it on another substrate, a silicon substrate, seems foolhardy.Anyway, it’s a more extended argument, and I may be wrong. And when we move to computers that aren’t based on silicon—neuromorphic computers and things like that—all bets may be off.AC: Regarding your point about LLMs being stuck in the world of our representations—the internet or whatever—and not being able to interact with reality, are these representations, the world of the internet, themselves part of reality? We’ve created the internet, but it’s still a real thing that exists. And so while the LLMs may be trapped within that part of reality, they’re nevertheless within reality and interacting with it and so on. So it’s not obvious that there’s a barrier there to them becoming conscious and being creative.MP: Yeah, I mean, if our consciousness is built out of human culture, which is what we’re talking about with all those representations. But I tend to think consciousness comes a bit more out of nature and friction with the natural world, but...AC: So there’s a fundamental divide between the natural world and human artefacts?MP: And we lose track of that, and especially people in this computer world. You know, the people who are creating these AI systems, my guess is they’ve been into video games since the age of three, and they didn’t go outside a lot. And their own contact with nature is somewhat limited. I could be wrong, it’d be a very interesting thing to ask, all the wizards of AI, whether they like to go fishing and hiking and do things like that. Or were they on computers from a very early age? I interviewed Blake Lemoine, the Google engineer who came to believe that LaMDA, the Google LLM out at the time, was conscious and deserved personhood. It was very clear that he didn’t see a distinction between this bubble in which he lived and the real world. And I think we’ve all been distanced from the natural world, and this is taking us even further away. But it’s still there, you know, and we still have bodies, and we’re still mortal, and we don’t live in a simulation.AC: I think that’s a great place to finish. Michael Pollan, thank you very much!
Doubling Down on Suno, the Platform for Creative Entertainment
Suno is making creation itself a form of entertainment and is just scratching the surface of this new mode of human expression.
Scientists are cracking the code of interspecies communication. Is that a good thing?
Bioacousticians are finding animal communication patterns once thought unique to humans — discoveries that challenge ideas about what makes human language special.
Human Science achieves Moodle Premium Certified Partner status in Japan
We’re delighted to share that Human Science has been elevated to Moodle Premium Certified Partner in Japan. Learn more in this post.
The Science Behind the Quest for a Non-Peptide Oral Weight Loss Drug A
A combination of human and artificial intelligence has paved the way for a GLP-1 agonist that is effective when taken by mouth.
Science: HHS Asking for Changes in NIH-Funded Research
The Department of Health and Human Services is now reviewing all grants approved by its National Institutes of Health, and HHS staff “sometimes ask for substantive changes in the research,”
Meet Microsoft Scout, Your AI Coworker That Never Logs Off
Microsoft’s OpenClaw-style agent appears in Teams, just like a human colleague, and automates your dull office tasks.
How Science Works
The 2nd Weather and Climate Livestream is now underway. It is organized by a group of early-career researchers concerned about declining funding for the field and eager to demonstrate how weather and climate research makes a difference in our lives. Last year’s event was a great success, drawing terrific press coverage including a piece in the NY Times. This year features a strong lineup of talks aimed at a general audience — I highly recommend tuning in. Share I gave a talk yesterday about How Science Works in Three Steps. You can see the short presentation here (I’ve appended a transcript below): And please tune into the livestream here. It runs through tomorrow at 6 pm ET. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe Cleaned up transcript: Thank you, and thanks to everyone tuning in. I want to talk about something I think a lot of people don’t really understand: how science actually works. Arguments over any scientific topic — climate change, vaccines, you name it — revolve around competing claims. For climate change, the claims are: Is the Earth warming? Are humans to blame? What will the impacts be? Over the last 150 years, the scientific community has developed a remarkably robust method for sorting out which claims are true and which aren’t. That method is what I want to walk through. So how does science generate knowledge? If you ask a high schooler, they’ll give you the version they learned in ninth grade: an individual scientist forms a hypothesis, runs an experiment, and draws a conclusion. That’s more or less what happens at the individual level, though in practice it’s more iterative — you design, test, and refine all at once, landing on a slightly different idea each time until you reach a conclusion about whatever hypothesis you’ve ended up with. But this isn’t science. It’s only step one. Any individual scientist can make mistakes — scientists are human. Maybe there’s a bug in the code, maybe there’s an error in the experiment. Just because someone ran an experiment and reached a conclusion doesn’t mean it’s right, and scientists don’t treat a single result as settled truth. Step two is peer review, the first layer of quality control. The scientist writes up what they did and submits it to a journal, which sends the paper to other experts in the field. Those experts judge whether the methods are sound, whether it properly references prior work, and whether the conclusions actually follow from the data. Ask any scientist and they’ll tell you peer review is miserable — the comments come back brutal, often harsh, and you have to revise and resubmit, sometimes multiple times, before an editor finally accepts the paper. Peer review catches an immense amount of bad science, but it can’t catch all of it. Reviewers get sloppy or overworked, they miss obvious mistakes, and they can’t catch hidden errors — a bug in the code, a misread instrument. So a peer-reviewed paper making it into a journal doesn’t mean the paper is right. Nobody treats a single paper as the final word. That’s where step three comes in: the crucible of science. Important results get retested by the broader community. If you publish something interesting, it gets dissected. Sometimes people try to reproduce your work directly but more often they test its implications. If someone claims X is true, and that implies that Y is also true, then scientists will go check Y. If a claim survives this gauntlet long enough, it becomes accepted. That’s how we generate knowledge. Let me give an example: the ozone hole. In 1985 — and I doubt many people watching were around then, but I remember it well — Joe Farman and his colleagues published observations from Antarctica showing that a huge chunk of ozone was disappearing every year. This was shocking because most atmospheric chemists had expected ozone loss to occur at mid-latitudes and high altitudes, not over the South Pole. When scientists see something they don’t understand, they rush to explain it, and several competing hypotheses quickly appeared in the peer-reviewed literature. One pointed to chlorine chemistry from chlorofluorocarbons. A second blamed nitrogen chemistry, possibly driven by solar proton events — meaning the sun was responsible. A third argued it wasn’t chemistry at all but dynamics: winds were carrying naturally low-ozone air from the lower atmosphere up into the stratosphere. Then the community went to work testing which theory could survive the crucible. Aircraft flew into the ozone hole and found no nitrogen, ruling out the nitrogen theory. Measurements showed the air in the polar vortex was descending, not rising — which would bring high-ozone air down, eliminating the dynamics theory. Meanwhile, those same flights measured enormous amounts of chlorine, strongly correlated with exactly the regions where ozone was being destroyed. That became known as the “smoking gun” paper, and it established that chlorine chemistry was the cause. Through this process, a consensus emerged. And it’s worth being clear that this consensus is organic. There’s no vote, no poll, no meeting where it gets decided. Scientists go to conferences, talk to one another, and independently arrived at the same answer. It’s the ultimate free market of ideas. After the consensus was established, the peer-reviewed literature doesn’t even mention the rival theories — it simply takes chlorine chemistry as given. That’s what a consensus looks like. It doesn’t mean every single scientist agrees, but it does mean there’s no longer any legitimate debate. So where can you see what scientists actually think? It’s all in the peer-reviewed literature, which contains the entire historical record of the argument: the discovery, the competing theories, the debate, the testing, and finally the community coalescing around one answer. But there’s a lot of room for misrepresentation. You can dig up an old paper claiming the ozone hole was caused by dynamics and wave it around as if there still was a debate about the cause of the ozone hole — without mentioning that the idea was disproven long ago and that even its own authors no longer believe it. There’s a bigger problem, though: the peer-reviewed literature is written in a language I call “nerd.” It’s extremely hard to read — honestly, some of it is hard for me to follow. It takes graduate students years to work through the literature in a single field, so we can’t expect policymakers or ordinary people to do it. This is where scientific assessments come in. The most famous is the IPCC — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The job of an assessment is to read and summarize the peer-reviewed literature, synthesizing what’s settled, what’s been disproven, and what remains genuinely debated. To ensure the assessments accurately summarize the peer-reviewed literature, assessments are written by large teams, which are far less prone to bias than individuals and which dilute the influence of any one scientist with an axe to grind. The teams are deliberately assembled to avoid stacking the deck, and the reports themselves go through multiple rounds of peer review. That rigorous process is exactly why you can trust them and why people consider the IPCC to be the gold standard of what we know about the climate system. An assessment produced through a different process may well not be credible. You can even watch the consensus evolve across assessments. Take the attribution of warming. The 1990 IPCC report said the observed warming was broadly consistent with model predictions but also comparable to natural variability — in other words, we don’t know whether humans are responsible. By 1995, it concluded that the balance of evidence suggested a discernible human influence — a sentence only a committee could write, and one that barely commits to anything. By 2001, most of the warming over the previous 50 years was judged “likely” due to greenhouse gases; by 2007, “very likely”; by 2013, “extremely likely.” The 2023 report says essentially the same as 2013 — there’s not much stronger language available. So, to wrap up: science is our ultimate tool for deciphering the universe — the most successful method we’ve ever developed for determining what’s true and what isn’t. Our understanding is written into the peer-reviewed literature, so if you want to know what scientists think, that’s where to look. And for those of us who don’t speak nerd, scientific assessments are the Rosetta Stone — they translate nerd into English. Let me open the floor to questions. Thank you.
The work you can't always see: Beer is political, part 2
Recently I published a piece about beer, politics, and the question of who speaks up and who doesn’t. I meant every word of it. I still do. And then my inbox opened up. Cleveland Prost is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe I’ve been writing about beer since 2014. For most of that time, I kept things deliberately light — taproom profiles, new releases, the people behind the pints. Gradually, over years of building this thing, you gave me something I didn’t expect: permission. Permission to go deeper. To say what I actually saw in this industry and what I actually believed about it. That trust isn’t something I take lightly. It’s why that piece existed at all, and it’s why this one does too. I’m not walking anything back. But I want to go further. In that piece, I wrote that beer has never existed outside the system. That immigration policy affects who staffs breweries and harvests ingredients. That labor policy affects taproom workers. That civil rights policy affects who feels safe walking into a taproom. That “beer does not exist in a vacuum. The idea that it does is comforting. It is also false.” I believe that as much now as I did when I wrote it. But one idea came back at me, in different forms, over and over (from reader emails, comments, and conversations): that beer itself isn’t political — that it only becomes political when someone decides to make it that way. That what we’re really seeing is a choice by individuals to inject division into something that doesn’t inherently require it. It’s a comforting idea. It’s also wrong — and I think it’s worth being precise about why. That framing assumes that breweries operate outside the conditions shaping everything else. That politics is something you choose to bring into a room that was, until then, clean and neutral. That if you stay quiet, you stay clear of it. But the room was never neutral. It was never clean. Politics is already in the room. It’s in who walks through the door comfortably and who hesitates. It’s in whether a space can be used for organizing without fear. It’s in whether helping someone quietly might carry consequences you have to think carefully about in advance. It’s in who staffed the brewery, who harvested the grain, who can afford to be a regular. The idea that you opt out of all that by staying quiet is an illusion. You only change how visible your response to it is. This is, I realize, a hard thing to hear if you came to a beer newsletter for something lighter. I wrote recently that “beer, for me, has always felt like a refuge — a third place in an increasingly fractured world.” I meant that. I still do. But a refuge is not an escape from reality. It’s a place to gather strength to face it. Here’s what I actually missed — and what I want to correct. Multiple people in the industry reached out to me. I’m not naming them and I’m not identifying their businesses, because that’s not my call. If and when they want to be loud about what they’re doing, that agency belongs to them. What I can share is the substance of what they said, because it complicated something I presented too cleanly. The overall message: *You don’t know what we all are doing.* And they’re right. I don’t. One example involved a collaboration brewed quietly to support another business facing serious challenges in a whole different region, with proceeds directed toward solidarity, community, and keeping operations afloat. No announcement. It could have been broadcast widely. The point was never publicity. Another example involved logistical support for community efforts: organizing safe transportation, providing space for meetings on otherwise closed days, facilitating gatherings under difficult conditions. All of it happening while balancing real financial pressure and genuine concern for personal safety. None of what they described is a brewer “deciding to make beer political.” It’s people responding to the conditions around them — conditions that are already shaping who feels safe, who has access, who can gather, who needs help, and who has the capacity to offer it. Politics, again, already in the room. Already shaping choices. Whether anyone announced it or not. I’ve spent decades in taprooms, at barrel releases, at festivals, in back offices and brewing floors, talking to the people who built this industry from nothing. I know how much happens that never makes it onto social media. I know the owner who quietly comp’d a tab for someone having a crisis. The brewer who drove an hour to pick up a stranger who needed a safe ride. The taproom that stayed dark on a Tuesday so a community group could use the space without it becoming A Whole Thing. None of that gets a post. Most of it never will. So when I wrote recently about silence — when I said that “silence right now doesn’t feel neutral, it feels like complicity” — I was writing about what I could see. And I was right about what I saw. The public silence of breweries that have the platform, the stability, and frankly the safety to say something and choose not to? That still troubles me. I’m not softening that. But some of what I read as silence is actually something else entirely. It’s people doing the work with their hands instead of their phones. It’s people who are genuinely afraid — not of being canceled, but of real consequences for their families, their employees, their ability to keep the doors open at all. That deserves more than a footnote. It deserves to be named clearly. Here’s the tension I want to sit with honestly: public statements matter. They matter because people can’t rally around something they can’t see. Visibility creates awareness and solidarity. It helps people find each other. It tells someone standing outside your taproom door, uncertain whether they’ll be welcomed inside, something they need to know — or whether it’s even safe for them to be in public at all. That’s not performative. I wrote recently that the craft beer movement “was built on collective defiance. It was built on rejecting consolidation. On pushing back against homogeneity.” I believe that too. And I’ll extend it: breweries should be at least as loud about their values as they are when they drop a new seasonal. Your hazy IPA gets a full rollout — the label art, the tap handle photo, the countdown post. Human dignity deserves the same energy. Be as loud about human rights as you are about your beer. There is no reason those two things should require different levels of courage from you. But visibility isn’t the only form of courage. And not everyone can be visible right now without real consequences — financial, personal, sometimes physical. There are people in this industry doing hard, unglamorous, sometimes risky work in the background, and announcing it would compromise it or paint a target on someone who’s already stretched thin. That’s not silence as complicity. That’s operational discipline under pressure. What I want to push back on — clearly, not gently — is the idea that behind-the-scenes action and public visibility are in competition with each other. The person organizing quietly in the back room and the person posting a statement of solidarity on a Tuesday morning are both doing something real. We need both. We need the quiet infrastructure and we need the visible signal. We need people to know that this industry — at its best, at its most independent, and human — gives a fuck. I closed that piece with a question: “Reactive and fearful? Or clear and values-driven?” That question still stands. But having heard from you, I’d add a corollary: the values-driven path isn’t always the loudest one. Sometimes it’s a phone call and a recipe. Sometimes it’s a room made available on a closed Tuesday. Sometimes it’s a drive across town for someone who needed a safe ride home. All of it is political. All of it was always political. You don’t get to opt out of that — you only get to decide what you do with it. I’ve spent more than a decade writing about this industry because I believe it can be exactly that. I’ve been lucky enough to build an audience that lets me say so plainly. That’s a privilege I intend to use. The work is happening. Some of it you’ll see. Some of it you won’t. Support it either way. Cleveland Prost is a reader-supported publication covering beer and brewing across New York state. To receive new posts and support this work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Cleveland Prost is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Health and Human Development ‘FirstBridge’ supports first-generation students
The Penn State College of Health and Human Development recently launched the FirstBridge Initiative, which supports first-generation students. The program aims to connect first-gen students with first-gen faculty in the College of Health and Human Development through meaningful engagement opportunities.
Alligator Alcatraz Emissions Threaten Human Health, Violate Clean Air Act, Lawsuit Claims
The air pollution is associated with the more than 200 diesel-burning generators powering the Everglades migrant detention facility, along with 100 diesel-burning lighting towers.
Why are scientists planting tiny forests in big cities?
Healthy forests help combat climate change, provide humans with drinking water and even improve mental and physical health. But it’s hard to imagine an entire forest in the middle of a big city. That’s where micro-forests come into play — public forests on a smaller scale, filled with native plants. They exist around the world, and producer Rachel Carlson went to visit the largest micro-forest in California in this encore episode. She joins host Emily Kwong to chat about what she saw. Interested in more of the science behind urban nature? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.
Gravitational wave astronomy is now a fully mature science
In 2016, humanity announced our first successful gravitational wave detection. 10 years and 389 events later, here's how far we've come.
The Politics of Visibility - Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center
To say that Michigan is facing a housing crisis often comes with the language of urgency, as if something sudden has happened, as if instability has only recently emerged. But that framing depends on the assumption that there was ever a moment of stability equally accessible to everyone. The reality is less abrupt and more patterned as housing insecurity in Michigan is not a new condition.