SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " deq " 157 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Building on its reputation, Chicago area becomes a force for workforce development
Chicago-area employers, colleges and nonprofits are creatively collaborating to ensure the region's talent pipeline stays robust and adequately filled.
Here's why the coaches association's 24-team College Football Playoff could ruin the sport
A 24-team College Football Playoff field would diminish the best regular season in sports and include teams with inadequate resumes to compete for a championship.
Fewer than half of US states adequately prepared for health emergency ahead of World Cup: Report
Fewer than half of U.S. states are sufficiently prepared for a health emergency, according to new research released on Thursday. Only 20 states scored “high” on the annual report from Trust for Am…
Over half of Israeli adults are overweight or obese, Knesset Health Committee told
31.4% of 7th graders overweight; officials blame high cost of medications, inadequate health services in low-income areas, lack of accessible educational materials in Arab, Ethiopian sectors
“Stranger Things: Tales From '85” scores quick season 2 renewal, will return sooner than expected
The animated "Stranger Things" spinoff was just released last week.
UK urged to deploy EU-style ‘trade bazooka’ against Trump’s tariffs
‘Inadequate economic security’ is putting growth and jobs at risk, says British Chambers of Commerce
NASCAR Cup Series entry list for Talladega in April 2026
Check out the NASCAR Cup Series entry list for the 2026 Jack Link's 500 at Talladega Superspeedway including the most notable drivers!
WV’s shortage of psychiatrists worst in the nation, report says
Trilliant Health, a Tennessee-based health care analytics and market research firm, released its 2026 Behavioral Health Report in April 2026 and reported that West Virginia has 5.7% of the adequate supply of psychiatrists needed to serve the state’s population, which is the lowest percentage of any state in the nation. Brad Story, the CEO of the West Virginia Behavioral Healthcare Providers Association, said this is the result of several converging challenges.
Shaky political science: using "simulated" elections over real-world elections
[Dear DSOS readers – this article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in early December, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting. We found that many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data, and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first three articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report, the second one analyzing a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report, and a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research]. In this fourth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we shine a spotlight on seven studies that were web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group (the ERRG is an ad hoc committee headed by New America’s Political Reform Program and joined by the American Enterprise Institute, the Unite America Institute and Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law). This research consortium has been led by Lee Drutman, senior fellow with New America’s Political Reform Program. These seven studies are simply not credible from any objective standard about how political “science” is supposed to illuminate our understanding of either ranked choice voting or politics in general. The feature that six of these seven studies have in common is that they all used surveys – artificial, simulated elections -- to attempt to say something cogent or interesting about ranked choice voting (RCV) elections. None of them used real world data from actual RCV elections – either the 1000+ elections in the US or the many thousands of elections from places like Australia, Ireland and elsewhere where RCV has been used for 100 years. While a few of these studies conclude with some mixed positives about RCV, our analysis here is content neutral. The idea that, with a political reform like RCV, you can ask respondents in a mock, artificial election to vote with that method, with only the barest of explanation about how RCV works or its likely impacts (i.e. no spoiler candidates, majority winners, voters liberated to pick their favorite candidates, coalition-building), and then ask them their thoughts/reactions about voting in that system, with fake candidates and no real campaigning, no real exposure to an actual election or actual candidates, rests on some very puzzling assumptions. The findings of these seven studies actually are contradicted by the findings from many other studies based on real-world RCV elections. These New America studies also failed to list the real-world RCV studies in their own citations, instead including those studies that reinforced their conclusions. The seven studies featured in this article were chosen because they form a cohesive cohort which precisely illustrates one of the main points of our research paper, namely that using surveys, i.e. artificial elections, or mathematical/theoretical models, instead of real-world data, is in fact “shaky political science.” Below are summaries of our analysis of five of the seven New America studies. You can read our complete analysis of all seven studies at our paper, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting.” Choosing to “Vote As Usual” by Andre Blais, Carolina Plescia, and Semra Sevi. New America. (Blais et al., 2021). This study, web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group, used two surveys in which respondents completed ballots for simulated elections using plurality, approval, RCV and point (Score) voting. In both cases the authors provided the respondents with only minimal explanation of each method. For example, the entire explanation for RCV was “For this vote, rank the candidates from your first to your last choice (you do not need to rank them all). This is called the ranked vote.” That’s it. The study did not provide any context or explanation to survey respondents about why she/he might want to rank multiple candidates. Participants were not even told that ballots would be tabulated using an “instant” runoff, not to mention any description of RCVs ability to eliminate the spoiler effect or liberate voters to rank their favorite candidates without fear of helping the “greater evil” candidate to win. That’s like taking an iPhone back in time to 1970 and asking someone if they like it better than their rotary phone without explaining how it works. Their first survey targeted states that held 2020 Super Tuesday Democratic primaries and used the real candidates’ names in the survey; the second survey used fictitious candidates. In other words, they surveyed respondents who had only ever participated in plurality elections, had no history or background with using RCV or any of the other methods, had no clue about its likely impacts, and did not communicate how the alternative methods would be counted, and then asked them: “How satisfied are you with using each system?” Predictably, the winner was plurality elections, the system used for president, Congress, gubernatorial and state legislative elections – in other words, the method they have been using, year after year, all their voting lives. With so little explanation of RCV and its impacts, this study is simply not credible in discovering anything useful about real-world RCV elections. It merely shows that a basic voter education campaign is needed when adopting a new election system. Additionally, the result contradicts many other post-election surveys following real RCV elections, asking opinions from voters who had just participated in a RCV election, that showed a great deal of satisfaction with RCV (see details on that in Studies 22-25 in our paper, as well as the four studies cited in the review for Study 28). Share Other studies on “satisfaction” and “understanding” make similar mistakes, in terms of basing their surveys on inadequate explanation to respondents and lack of education about context. How could any survey ever hope to measure accurately, in essence simulate a real-world election, without actual campaigning candidates, the media writing about those candidates, organizations endorsing candidates and voters being inundated with crucial information? More than anything, what these “studies” based on surveys show is that if you ask voters about something they don’t know very much about, and fail to adequately educate them, their responses will unsurprisingly reflect their confusion. Equally puzzling is that New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group, headed by political scientist Lee Drutman, found this to be a credible enough study that they not only published it but highlighted it in Drutman’s own discussion of research related to ranked choice voting. This pattern was repeated in study after study featured by New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group. For example in Ranked-Choice Voting and Political Expression: Voter Guides Narrow the Gap between Informed and Uninformed Citizens by Cheryl Boudreau, Jonathan Colner, and Scott MacKenzie, the researchers based their analysis on a survey which found that respondents who were asked to vote in a simulated RCV election, with minimal explanation of RCV or how it works, displayed less evidence of being informed about how to use RCV effectively, with the least informed voters ranking fewer candidates. As pointed out under the study above, in a real election voters are informed by a wide variety of methods, including public education by the election administration, by interested political groups, the media, and the candidates themselves who benefit from voters being aware of how to vote in the new system. In Support for Ranked-Choice Voting across Race and Partisanship by Joseph Anthony, David C. Kimball, Jack Santucci and Jamil Scott, the researchers used respondents from different parties and races voting in simulated plurality and RCV elections, who indicated their satisfaction with each voting method. Instead of using real world election results, the authors fell back on the easy, armchair and less reliable academic research methodology of making up mock elections. As with the other studies, little explanation was given of how RCV works or what its implications might be (electing majority winners or eliminating spoilers, for example). Unsurprisingly, this study found that respondents were not very satisfied with RCV. However, when the authors added an explanation that RCV has a tendency to elect more women and people of color, they found that this greater explanation increased the preference for RCV. The more voters were familiar with it, and the more they understood potential positive impacts – surprise! -- the more they were open to switching away from the status quo. Of note, the results from this study are thoroughly contradicted by a number of other studies whose data was obtained from real RCV elections with real voters. Those studies show a great deal of satisfaction with RCV. More “fake election” research An interesting wrinkle on this “research by fake elections” approach, which only served to illustrate how unreliable such “research” can become, was taken in Ranked-Choice Voting, Runoff, and Democracy: Insights from Maine and Other U.S. States by Joseph Cerrone and Cynthia McClintock_,_ also web-hosted and funded by New America’s ERRG. It gets high marks for creativity, but an eye-roll for thinking this could possibly add anything meaningful to our understanding of real world RCV elections. This study tried to determine whether RCV, plurality or two-round runoff elections provided greater voter satisfaction and acceptance of election results. To determine that, the authors conducted a survey asking if voters were satisfied with a fictional newspaper report of an election, with three different versions given to respondents – plurality, runoff and RCV, with variations of Republican/Democrat winners and variations of “come-from-behind” winners,” i.e. candidates not initially in first place but who win the “runoff.” Again, a minimal explanation of RCV or how it works was given, and the survey showed that respondents had the greatest unfamiliarity with RCV than the other methods. The unsurprising result? Respondents were much more satisfied with “come-from-behind” victories in a traditional two-round runoff election than in RCV, even though RCV is also a runoff system but with a single round of counting. Interestingly, the dissatisfaction with RCV disappeared for those who were more familiar with RCV. In fact, among those respondents who were “very familiar” with RCV, they were equally satisfied with RCV, runoff and plurality. Surprise, surprise. Again, what this study revealed, more than anything, is not only the inadequacy of the explanation for RCV given by the authors of this study, but the failure of the research format itself, thinking that such an artificial mock election could somehow simulate what actually happens in the real world in a real RCV election. Those four studies reviewed above are fitting examples of inadequate and shaky political “science.” Other studies reviewed in our paper from the New America/Electoral Reform Research Group cohort which also used mock elections included: Ranked-Choice Voting is an Acquired Taste by Joseph Anthony and David C. Kimball. New America. (Anthony et al., 2021). Ranked-Choice Voting is No Refuge for Extreme Candidates by Melissa Baker. New America. (Baker, 2021). Also included in this New America cohort is Does Ranked-Choice Voting Reduce Racial Polarization? by Yuki Atsusaka and Theodore Landsman, which actually did use real-world election results data but applied an odd and unconventional methodology to the data which relied on shaky assumptions and non-real-world scenarios that were too divorced from reality. To determine levels of “racially polarized voting,” the researchers imagined “ethnic parties,” by which they mean political parties for each ethnic group, which was especially odd since the election data they were using came from nonpartisan RCV races. But then they made an even odder assumption, namely that since race and ethnic characteristics of studied voters were not available, the authors tried to infer that information based on who voters selected and the racial make-up of voters in each district. This amounted to little more than vague and ambiguous guesswork dressed up with a bunch of mathematical equations used to give it a veneer of scientific appearance. Indeed, it seemed to assume racial polarization in order to prove racial polarization. Based on this questionable methodology, the authors concluded that RCV doesn’t reduce racial polarization. But the premise of this study missed an obvious reality: since RCV incentivizes more candidates to run and can result in more diverse fields of candidates, one would expect more racially-polarized voting in voters’ top rankings, not less, because more voters would have someone on that ballot who represents their racial or ethnic identity and more freedom to vote for their real first choice. By encouraging more diverse candidates and eliminating the spoiler effect, RCV facilitates voting for a favorite candidate of your own race and then selecting a second choice with the best likelihood of winning. The real measure is what voters do with their additional rankings – do they consider other candidates and vote “for the best of the rest”? This study didn’t tell us anything useful about that. But readily available data shows this is common in real RCV elections, and candidates act on this knowledge by engaging with voters outside their racial group. So the authors of this study failed to consider or account for what actually happens in real-world elections, and their conclusions are tainted by this failure. New America has contributed a great deal over the past 2.5 decades to our understanding of many policy areas, including politics and political reform (full disclosure: Steven Hill, one of the authors of this article and of the “Shaky Political Science” research paper and series, is a former senior fellow and former director of New America’s political reform program, 2005-2010). So it was especially disappointing that New America funded and published such a large batch of dubious studies about ranked choice voting. The stated praiseworthy goal of its Electoral Reform Research Group was to inspire new academic research about ranked choice voting that would shed light and help the public better understand the impacts of RCV. Instead, the ERRG research did just the opposite. It produced dubious research that created more confusion and misinformation. In so doing, New America’s political reform program contributed to “shaky political science.” Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS, a reader-supported digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe
More than 7 million have Alzheimer's. Can your brain health improve?
People have no control over Alzheimer's risk factors such as age, genes and family history. Diet, exercise and adequate sleep improve brain health.
U.S. Delivers Maternal Health Equipment Across Madagascar - U.S. Embassy in Madagascar
U.S. Delivers Maternal Health Equipment Across Madagascar U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Stephanie Arnold today provided critical maternal and newborn health equipment that will reach healthcare facilities across Madagascar, demonstrating how U.S. foreign assistance builds a safer, healthier world by helping recipient countries build self-reliant health systems in line with the America First Global Health Strategy. Under President Trump’s America First foreign assistance policy and the America First Global Health Policy, U.S. support serves as a tool of strategic engagement – not global charity. Every U.S. taxpayer dollar is subject to rigorous oversight to ensure measurable results, maximum efficiency, and accountability, with zero tolerance for fraud, waste, or abuse. Through the bilateral Global Health Memorandum of Understanding with Madagascar’s Ministry of Public Health, both governments agreed on shared priorities and responsibilities, including a strong focus on maternal and newborn health and Madagascar’s increasing co-investment in its own health system. Madagascar continues to face major challenges in maternal and newborn health, including high maternal mortality rates and significant gaps in access to quality delivery care. In rural regions, many women still give birth at home or in facilities without adequate infection-prevention supplies. Through the U.S.-funded Momentum Country and Global Leadership Project, the United States is providing essential equipment to healthcare facilities nationwide: calibrated reusable drapes for infection prevention in approximately 1,000 community health centers (CSBs), single-use calibrated drapes for 35 hospitals, and management tools for health workers to improve data collection and care coordination. “U.S. foreign assistance makes America safer by preventing instability and strengthening health systems that can detect and contain infectious diseases before they cross borders,” said Chargé d’Affaires Arnold during the handover ceremony. “Our support is temporary and targeted, designed to help Madagascar build greater self-reliance and reduce long-term dependence on U.S. taxpayer resources.” This U.S. support will help standardize safe delivery practices, strengthen infection prevention, and improve data management systems. Used effectively, these materials will contribute directly to reducing maternal and newborn deaths, especially in rural and hard-to-reach areas where access to quality delivery care remains limited. From major hospitals to remote health centers, U.S.-funded equipment is already delivering results. The nationwide scope of this support ensures that women and newborns across Madagascar benefit from improved infection prevention and safer delivery practices. This targeted assistance helps save lives today while supporting Madagascar’s transition toward a self-sufficient health system, ensuring that today’s U.S. support leads to Madagascar’s future independence from foreign assistance.
‘Sport as a Public Good’ talk spotlights gaps in youth sports education, access
There’s little that people enjoy more than play. Unfortunately, when it comes to our youth, we often fail in nurturing that love, former President of the U.S. Tennis Association and Chief Medical Officer of the NCAA Brian Hainline said. On Wednesday, April 15, Hainline spoke at the University of New Mexico Physics and Astronomy Interdisciplinary Science Building and said sports should be a public good to an audience including local sport leaders and athletes. He highlighted what he called an inadequate systemic support for sports in the U.S. Hainline’s lecture was hosted jointly by the UNM School of Medicine and Alumni Association.
Bengals News (4/19): A big day for Cincinnati
The league is buzzing about the Dexter Lawrence trade.
I test compact and film cameras for a living, and here are my top 12 recommendations for the summer
Perfect for sun-kissed shots
Kentucky needs to add some shooters from the transfer portal
The Kentucky Wildcats are still working to add talent from the transfer portal, but they badly need to get some shooters.
Pokemon Champions Review
Pokemon Champions brings competitive battling to the masses but fails to adequately explain all of its intricacies.
Pacoima businesses voice safety concerns as RV encampments disrupt local commerce
Pacoima business owners express safety concerns over RV encampments driving customers away, claiming inadequate responses from local officials.
ASUS Zenbook A16 Undercuts Apple’s MacBook Pro Lineup With Its $1,600 Price That Includes Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme, Tons Of RAM & Adequate Storage
Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme notebooks are expected to be expensive, but the ASUS Zenbook A16 defies those practices with its $1,599.99 price tag
Gary Woodland grabs emotional first PGA Tour win after brain surgery, PTSD diagnosis: 'Just keep fighting'
"I’ve got a big fight ahead of me, and I’m going to keep going. But I’m proud of myself right now.”
How the landmark verdict against Meta and YouTube could hit their businesses
People use social media to keep up with their friends and family, but teens can also feel inadequate, sad or anxious when they compare themselves to a curated version of other people's lives online.
MacBook Neo Silences Critics Over 8GB RAM Being Inadequate; Can Open 60 Apps In Unison While Windows Laptop Powers Off Performing The Same Task
A YouTube channel decided to take the MacBook Neo for an apps stress test and opened up 60 apps at the same time to see if that 8GB RAM will be sufficient
Forum on harnessing Artificial Intelligence for health equity
Register to this forumOver the past decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly evolved in complexity, performance, and utility. Its integration across a wide range of industrial sectors has accelerated, with healthcare emerging as one of the most transformative sectors. In this sector, AI has enabled high-impact applications – from enhancing the speed and accuracy of disease diagnosis and supporting clinical decision-making, to strengthening public health initiatives such as disease surveillance and workforce optimization. Moreover, AI holds immense potential to empower individuals, enabling them to take greater control of their personal health and well-being. Yet the central question remains: Who benefits, who is at risk, and do these innovations close or widen health inequities? While the potential of AI-enabled applications is substantial, many countries have approached their adoption with caution. This hesitancy stems from concerns about risks and benefits, including model bias, data breaches, privacy violations, and the erosion of professional skills due to over-reliance on AI. Additional barriers include inadequate data infrastructure and a lack of robust evidence on the most effective forms and interfaces of AI to enhance service delivery and system performance. Moreover, the rapid rise of Generative AI has introduced a heightened urgency for the development of comprehensive governance and ethical frameworks. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) Health Practice Team and Digital Sector, in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for the Western Pacific, are convening the Forum on Harnessing AI for Health Equity on 25–26 March at ADB Headquarters. Senior health officials from 16 developing member countries (DMCs), alongside leading researchers, innovators, and policymakers from across Asia and the Pacific, will engage in discussions on how AI can be governed, financed, and scaled to deliver healthier lives for all. The forum is funded through the High-Level Technology Fund with support from the Government of Japan. Objectives The two-day forum aims to:Identify high-impact, evidence-based health AI use cases suitable for resource-constrained settings and map out a pipeline for potential supportIntroduce and validate the WHO's policy guidance on minimum necessary ecosystem for countries and institutions to self-assess readiness for AI adoptionObtain initial commitment from participating stakeholders to join a pilot regional initiative focused on data/model sharing for a priority health challengeEndorse a prioritized set of actionable policy recommendations focusing on governance, regulation, and sustainable financing necessary to scale high-impact health AI use cases in resource-constrained settings Target participants The forum will convene participants from 16 ADB DMCs including Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Mongolia, Nepal, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Viet Nam. In addition, health system leaders and practitioners, private sector technologists, academic experts, representatives from civil society organizations, development partners, and philanthropic institutions engaged in AI for Health from Australia, the People’s Republic of China, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, and the Republic of Korea will also be invited. SessionsDay 1 (25 March)Session 1: AI Use Cases for the Care Continuum: Improving Access and QualitySession 2: Adopting a risk-based approach for AI use case prioritizationSession 3: Establishing the Minimum Ecosystem for Implementation Risk ManagementSession 4: Future-Ready Health Workforce: Building Competency for Human-AI CollaborationDay 2 (26 March)Session 5: The Political Economy of AI in Health: Understanding Stakeholder Interests and their Impact on EquitySession 6: AI and Health Financing: Supporting Fair Coverage and ProtectionSession 7: AI Regulation and Oversight: Pathways for Different RealitiesSession 8: The Way Forward – Building Alliances and Regional Partnership How to registerThe forum will be held in a hybrid format. In-person attendance is by invitation only, while livestreaming of the forum will be available to the public. To register, please complete this form on or before 24 March 2026.Event organizers / partnersAsian Development Bank (ADB)WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific High-Level Technology Fund (HLTF)ContactAkihito WatabeHealth Specialist, SD3-HSDawatabe@adb.org Jae Kyoun KimHealth Specialist, SD3-HSDjkkim@adb.org
Oz Says California’s Not Fighting Health Care Fraud. Data Shows a Larger Battle
By Don Thompson | KFF Health News SACRAMENTO, Calif. — For weeks, Mehmet Oz has been waging a public feud with California leaders over health care fraud, accusing the blue state of failing to adequately combat such abuse. Oz, who heads the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, alleged that
Manchester schools ask business leaders to push for adequate funding
Manchester Superintendent of Schools Jennifer Chmiel went before members of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce at it’s offices on Friday, urging business owners to advocate for adequate funding for
Meta is killing end-to-end encryption in Instagram DMs
Meta is killing end-to-end encryption in Instagram DMs citing low adoption of the privacy-focused feature.
Commentary: IC does not adequately support club sports
The memories, lessons and love that softball has brought me have proven invaluable, and that is something worth protecting. This institution does not give us money and actively impedes on our ability to play and practice. Access to Kostrinsky Field, even for just one day across a semester, would be a game-changer.
African Public Health Emergency Management Fellowship Cohort III Announcement
CONTEXTCombating the several public health threats across the African continent requires adequately trained and equipped workforce. The Africa Health Security and Sovereignty (AHSS) Agenda has called for self-sustaining health security program that includes workforce development. The call is in alignment with the vision of the African Union (AU) and its desire to build capacity in […]
Waitlists, gaps in care and escalating crises: Advocates say CT lacking adequate child mental health care
The need for more mental health providers is a systemic problem and therefore the legislature and DCF must find a way to increase meaningful supports for children, advocates and lawyers say.
Governor Hochul Launches Public Awareness Campaign to Educate New Yorkers on Access to Behavioral Health Treatment
Governor Kathy Hochul today announced the launch of a public awareness campaign to educate New Yorkers on regulations that improve access to mental health and substance use disorder care. The ‘Real Care, Real Access to Behavioral Health Services’ campaign highlights regulations that give New Yorkers with qualifying health plans access to initial outpatient appointments for behavioral health care within ten business days of the request and require insurers to help insured individuals access the care they are entitled to receive.
Michigan House committee hears testimony alleging mold, drugs, lack of health care at women’s prison
Lawmakers heard alarming testimony Tuesday detailing years of alleged neglect, toxic mold, illegal drugs, and inadequate health care at Michigan’s only women’s prison, prompting calls for oversight and policy changes.
A Bad Week for Clean Water and Public Health: How President Trump’s Glyphosate Executive Order and the 2026 Farm Bill Threaten Us All
On Wednesday, President Trump signed an executive order titled Promoting the National Defense by Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Elemental Phosphorus...
Judge orders takeover of Arizona prison health care operations after years of violations
The decision on Thursday by U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver came after her 2022 verdict that concluded Arizona had violated prisoners’ rights by providing inadequate care that led to suffering and preventable deaths.
K&C Sports & Entertainment Law Weekly Roundup
A suit by parents accusing a Little League Baseball organization of inadequate training of coaches and unsafe conditions for players was thrown out by a Connecticut state judge, who ruled that...
The New York Times
Casey Wasserman, an entertainment executive and chair of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics whose name recently surfaced in the Epstein files, said on Friday he has started the process of selling his...
‘This is in jeopardy’: Whatcom County schools’ mental health funds are drying up
School districts across Washington have been sounding the alarm for years that state funding isn’t adequately covering public education.
Health watchdog rates care home in Thorrington as 'inadequate
Inspectors say the home was not finding suitable ways to stop altercations between residents.
Science & Medicine: Early screening to prevent congenital heart disease
Congenital heart disease can often be detected at the mid-pregnancy ultrasound, which dramatically improves outcomes. But too many people don’t get adequate prenatal care.
Takeaways From the 2025 IADMS Conference on Occupational Health Hazards
The 35th annual IADMS conference, in Las Vegas in September, hosted more than 650 dance medicine providers, researchers, and educators representing 28 countries. Dr. David Hinkamp’s keynote on occupational health encouraged the dance community to consider the environmental factors that contribute to the industry’s injury rates—things like moving sets, dangerous props, lighting, sound, dry ice, improper flooring, or inadequate breaks between performances or rehearsals.
Should Bengals worry much about Steelers' odd coaching decision?
The Bengals continue to stand firm while the Steelers and other AFC North teams reset with new coaches.
Health groups sue EPA over insecticide that causes testicular damage in rats
Groups say EPA did not adequately consider adverse health effects to children when it approved the pesticide
Lindsay Clancy’s husband sues mental health providers, accuses them of overmedicating Duxbury mother prior to killings
If Lindsay Clancy had received adequate care, the suit alleges, “it is more likely than not that Patrick and Lindsay's children would still be alive today.”
Research suggests bamboo-based foods could support metabolic health
This systematic review synthesizes human, in vitro, and food-processing studies on bamboo consumption, finding limited but suggestive evidence for metabolic, digestive, and antioxidant benefits when products are properly prepared. It also highlights safety considerations, including potential goitrogenic effects from inadequately processed shoots, and calls for higher-quality human trials.
Despite concerns, Oakland Co. health says Legionella response adequate
Oakland County health and facilities officials argue their timeline for testing county facilities for bacteria that causes Legionnaires' Disease was adequate in response concerns from a commissioner who put them under the microscope at a Tuesday committee meeting.
Health professionals should be wearing respirator-grade masks, WHO is advised
Experts are urging guideline changes for doctors and nurses as surgical masks offer ‘inadequate protection against airborne pathogens’ such as Covid
This breakfast staple may be doing more for your heart than you think
New research suggests orange juice may support heart health by lowering blood pressure, reducing inflammation and improving fat metabolism at the genetic level.
AI chatbots miss urgent issues in queries about women's health
AI models such as ChatGPT and Gemini fail to give adequate advice for 60 per cent of queries relating to women’s health in a test created by medical professionals
Audit of the Financial and Operating Practices of the Joint Health Insurance Stabilization Fund
To the Residents of the City of New York, My office has audited the Health Insurance Stabilization Fund (HISF) to determine the Fund’s financial condition, whether the Fund was used for its intended purpose(s), and whether expenditures were reasonable, appropriate, adequately supported, and properly authorized. The audit found that HISF...
The disunity of science is a feature, not a bug
Mathematical models wield miraculous power, but mistaking them for reality has trapped science in a destructive quest for a “Theory of Everything.” Physicist and philosopher Ragner Fjelland argues that this leads to bloated, Frankenstein theories kept alive by clumsy, ad-hoc amendments, which reduce rather than boost science’s power. Fjelland calls for a radical shift in our attitude: we must reorientate towards creating entirely new theories, celebrating rather than lamenting disunity and diversity in science. Science, from the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century to the present day, has more or less developed in a “reductionist” way. The fundamental assumption is that all sciences may be ordered in a hierarchy that can be represented as an upside-down pyramid. At the top we find the human sciences, and at the bottom physics. Strong (or “ontological”) reductionism maintains that all theories at one level can be completely reduced to the lower level, all the way down to theories of atoms and elementary particles, or whatever is “at the bottom.” In the end, all diversity in the world can be unified in one fundamental theory. Hence it is called a final theory, or a Theory of Everything.One of the central figures in developing the idea of a Theory of Everything is the Dutch theoretical physicist Gerard 't Hooft, who received a Nobel Prize in physics in 1999 for his work. He emphasizes the non-empirical status of the theory:There exists no closely resembling alternative theory. This means that any slight change brought about in the rules would make the theory unlikely or inelegant. The theory will be a "package deal": take it, or leave it. This should hold both for the local laws and for the boundary conditions.This endeavor is not new. On the contrary, it goes all the way back to the birth of Western philosophy 2,500 years ago. The Babylonians made regular astronomical observations during a period of 600 years, from 747 BCE until 150 ACE. They developed mathematical techniques to predict astronomical phenomena, but they made no attempts at explaining them. However, the Greeks developed models, both material and theoretical, to explain the observed phenomena.The best example is Plato’s late dialogue Timaeus. Here he introduces a divine craftsman, the Demiurge, who has constructed the universe according to an original plan. Plato seems to have thought that the original plan is what is actually real, while the material world is merely an imperfect realization of it. He therefore does not, in the Timaeus, reconstruct the material universe, but the original plan, which can then be used to explain the material universe.Plato’s aim in producing a theoretical model is to reconstruct the original plan. That is what he carries out in Timaeus—and some modern physicists have embarked on the same project. For example, Einstein’s basic attitude is reflected in the title of Abraham Pais’ biography: “Subtle is the Lord...,” echoing Einstein’s comment, “Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.” In an interview Einstein compared our situation to a child who enters a huge library. The child knows that someone has written the books, but he does not know the languages in which they are written. He suspects that there is a mysterious order, but he does not know what it is.___“We have all been working in what Husserl called the Galilean style; that is, we have all been making abstract mathematical models of the universe to which at least the physicists give a higher degree of reality than they accord the ordinary world of sensation.”Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in Physics (1979)___This Platonist view is contrary to a widespread impression of science, symbolized by the picture of the “father” of modern science, Galileo Galilei, with his telescope. According to this impression, Galileo liberated himself from the dominating metaphysics of his day—basically Aristotelian philosophy—and constructed a telescope that he directed towards the sky, showing that Jupiter has four moons. He also performed experiments with bronze balls rolling down inclined planes and found the law of freely falling bodies.However, in other cases Galileo emphasized the unreliability of our senses. It is easy to see why. He defended Copernicus’ heliocentric hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, we are not at rest at the center of the universe, but moving at a tremendous speed through space. Why don’t we observe this motion? Galileo praises Copernicus because “with reason as his guide he resolutely continued to affirm what sensible experience seemed to contradict.” In other places he directly refers to Plato. SUGGESTED VIEWING The quest for a final theory With Michio Kaku Galileo’s Platonism goes back to his early writings. In The Assayer, published as early as 1623, Galileo compared the universe to a grand book that is written in the language of mathematics, and “its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it.” Therefore, things that cannot be described by mathematics—for example, colors, smells and odors—are not real. They are merely subjective.This division into subjective and objective, advocated by Galileo and his younger contemporary René Descartes, is normally associated with a mechanistic world view, which is regarded as the opposite of Platonism. When we reduce something to, for example, molecules and atoms, we move “downwards.” In contrast, the Platonist moves “upwards,” to abstract entities. However, it only shows that when we address fundamental questions, we should be careful in applying everyday spatial metaphors like “up” and “down.”___Nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world.___The endeavor of finding a Theory of Everything has been heavily criticized. In 2006, the theoretical physicist Lee Smolin published “The Crisis in Fundamental Physics.” He argued that one of the most fundamental principles of science is that we should only regard theories as scientific if we have the possibility to show that they are false by experiments. Although he did not refer to Karl Popper, other critics have referred to Popper and argued that a theory is not scientific if it cannot be falsified (see for example Ellis & Silk 2014).These were not the first physicists to be anti-reductionists. In 1972, the journal Science published an article by the physicist Philip Anderson with the title “More Is Different.” This is the kind of article a scientist would normally write only after he has won a Nobel Prize. However, Anderson won the Nobel Prize for physics five years later, in 1977. The article is amazing, not primarily because it argues in favor of anti-reductionism in general, but because it argues for anti-reductionism within physics itself. Anderson’s conclusion was:At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry.We may say that Plato started the “unity of science movement,” based on Euclidean geometry as the model of all knowledge. A distinguishing mark of geometry is that all possible constructions can be reduced to a few fundamental principles. We have to acknowledge that this approach has limitations. In general, we can easily model technological systems. In addition, we may construct simplified and idealized models that capture important aspects of systems, from various perspectives and for various purposes. But nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world. In a complex system, each level has its distinct, emergent, properties that are characteristic of this level. Therefore, a complex system should be investigated at different levels and from different perspectives. Instead of exclusively pursuing a scientific ideal based on the unity of science, we should acknowledge the diversity—or even the disunity—of science.
Opinion | UCare’s collapse is a warning light for our health care system
"We must act decisively to protect consumers, stabilize our insurance markets and ensure that no Minnesotan loses access to the care they need because the system around them is collapsing," Matt Klein writes.
Impact on global mental health care delivery and research
According to the World Health Organization, more than 1 billion people worldwide live with a mental health condition, yet most do not receive adequate care. Persistent barriers such as underfunding, workforce…
A Physics Renaissance Is Coming
The field can no longer ignore the fundamental mystery posed by living things.
New York City's Congestion Pricing Is Increasing Foot Traffic And Helping Businesses
EDC claims a 4.8% increase in foot traffic throughout areas of lower Manhattan, compared to a 1% increase for business areas not affected by congestion pricing.
Column | Carolyn Hax: Unemployment and health issues add up to ‘feeling inadequate’
Solutions to both problems are in progress. In the meantime, how does the letter writer push through difficult conversations?
Health Secretary Neil Gray insists there are 'adequate stocks' of flu vaccine
Over a million adults and 400,000 children received the flu jab between September and November.
Sources: Kentucky hiring Oregon offensive coordinator Will Stein to replace Mark Stoops
Kentucky fired Mark Stoops on Monday after 13 seasons.
Science must move from materialism to mystery
Theoretical physicist and neuroscientist Àlex Gómez-Marín argues that modern science has become trapped in a framework that mistakes matter for the whole of reality. In this wide-ranging interview, Gómez-Marín challenges the foundations of materialism, defends the scientific study of near-death experiences, and calls for a new type of science grounded in mystery and a renewed sense of the sacred. He suggests that abandoning materialism could open the door to a deeper understanding of consciousness, death, and the purpose of human existence. Simon Custer: You are both a theoretical physicist and a neuroscientist, and you have also been fiercely critical of materialist theories of mind and consciousness. What do you think the ultimate nature of reality is?Àlex Gómez-Marín: I don't know what the ultimate nature of reality is, but what I try to first assess is whether the stories that they [mainstream science] have told us about it are right, or maybe whether there are other alternatives. That's why I've been a fierce critic of materialism. As a scientist, I realized that they had sold us this idea that to be a good scientist you also had to subscribe to many other -isms, like materialism, reductionism, and even secularism. And so first I think one needs to unmount these -isms, and then, as is happening today in consciousness studies, we have a huge landscape where there isn't only one game in town, the idea that matter is the only thing that really exists. But because we are studying the hard problem of consciousness, it may be the case that other views of reality, like idealism, or even dualism, or other theories like dual aspect monism... these are philosophical ideas that now, I think, have room in science to be taken seriously. How does something like materialism relate to dualism or idealism? What is materialism in the first place?Well, materialism is the philosophical position that matter is the only really ‘real’ thing in the universe. And I think that worked kind of well because science started 400 years ago and Galileo made that split, I call it the foundational wound. It was a great business move.He said, let's start doing science on that portion of reality that lends itself more easily to mathematization and measurement. So, for some reason, the solidity of this table or the movement of planets lend themselves very well to this foundational idea of science. But as time went on, 400 years later, we realized that we had forgotten the other side, which is what really matters.What really matters is pain, is love, is feelings, sensation, consciousness, which is very hard to define, but very intimate. We all know what it is. It's that thing that disappears when we go into deep sleep and comes back in the morning. SUGGESTED VIEWING On the edges of knowledge With Michael Shermer, Rupert Sheldrake, Güneş Taylor It's what it is like to be, as Nagel said. It's the feeling of being alive. So, materialism is good to study certain things, but then when it ossifies into this ideology and then is dressed like science, now it's preventing us from understanding these key questions that are really that everybody wants to know.Why are we here? Why do we feel reality? Where do we go when we die? And so we need other ways. We need pluralism. I'm only asking for having more options on the table and taking them seriously. Why does materialism fail to explain consciousness? For example, if you were to lobotomize me, I would not be a functional human being. What do you say to someone who might think that materialism adequately explains the mind?Well, here we could speak about different things. We could talk about physics or about neuroscience. I happen to have training with both.For instance, for neuroscientists, 99% of them, I'm not included in that portion, believe that the brain can only be a productive organ. It's an organ that somehow, somewhere, consciousness emerges. It's like a lamp. And then something happens, magic happens, and then consciousness emerges.That's the position you need to be if you're a materialist because if the only really ‘real’ thing is matter, then you need to say, just give us some more time and money and we'll figure out how mind emerges or is produced from matter. There are many philosophically sophisticated ways of criticizing this.Now there's another option, which is the brain as a permissive organ. This was said by William James more than 100 years ago.Now then the brain wouldn't be like this machine, like for instance, a heat engine whose smoke is consciousness, which is what we would have in the first big model, the productive model. But in the permissive model, the brain would be a kind of a filter. And so the brain would still have a very important role in consciousness, but it wouldn't be a productive role.It would be permissive, much like a filter or much like a prism which would receive light. And - I'm speaking metaphorically - it would receive the light of the mind and then it could reflect it and refract it.Now, with these two big options on the table, I think we can make progress into what I call the edges of consciousness, which are all these experiences, weird experiences that many people have, but we don't talk about enough, like near-death experiences, precognitive dreams, synchronicities. These experiences are very important for humans and they have a place in the permissive hypothesis and they are literally impossible in the productive hypothesis. So that's yet one more reason to explore alternatives to materialism. There may be anecdotal evidence for near-death experiences, but is there robust evidence that would be accepted by the majority of scientists who subscribe to the scientific method?Sure. And the plural of anecdotes, someone said, is data.And there's a lot of data. Actually, this year is the 50th anniversary, half a century, since Dr. Raymond Moody realized that we have two ears and one mouth and started listening to what his patients had to say about their experiences while they were clinically dead.The heart had stopped, breathing had stopped in these patients. These patients would come back and tell him these amazing stories that some people may say are hallucinations, but for the patients were hyper-real, like seeing light at the end of the tunnels, seeing deceased family members waiting for them, feeling bliss.___I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain.___And so he and others started taking them seriously and writing their accounts down. And then you can do a science based on that material of experience that people have. Now, on the more objective side, more recently people have started to measure what's going on in the brain when people are clinically dead and brought back. This has opened a proper field of study, which is near-death studies.Evidence is a difficult word, because sometimes people think that when you say evidence, this is just the final proof. Evidence is like in a jury. You bring testimony, you bring pieces of data that point in one direction or another.I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain. When brains are broken or shut off, there can still be mind going on. And that's revolutionary.That would entail that when we die, it's not game over, which, by the way, is the thesis of materialism. If consciousness survives, materialism dies. It's game over for materialism if something of us continues after we die. Do you think that there is mental continuity after death?Well, I think so, and I believe so, and I could also say I may have experienced it myself, because four years ago I had a near-death experience. I was in the hospital, I lost a lot of blood, and I saw those beings at the end of the tunnel, three beings, and there was yellow light. I was in a well, I was looking upwards, and I hadn't read about NDEs by then, but when I came back from this experience, I decided I would try to integrate this also in my professional life. Not just my personal life, of course, but my professional life as a physicist and as a neuroscientist. So I may have had the experience of glimpses of what an afterlife would be, and I'm not ashamed to say it in this way, and then one can do science of it, and then one can do philosophy of it.One can think about what -isms we were discussing, what views on reality would allow those experiences to be really ‘real,’ as opposed to, well, poor guy, the brain was kind of broken, it must have been a hallucination. Do you have a view about whether individuality or “the ego” persists after death, or whether we sort of merge into some sort of cosmic consciousness instead?I don't know, but my view would be along those lines you're suggesting. I think we could speak about a kind of universal mind, and then the problem is not how we emerge from matter, but how we fragment from a more holistic consciousness into these individual eddies and then when we die, this kind of dissipates.But I'm not sure. For instance, idealism would promote that view, but then what would survive of us after these eddies just vanish and become again the big Consciousness, I'm not sure what that would be. I don't know for sure, but I would tell you I believe something of us survives.And there are other lines of research, not just near-death experience, that can address this really hard question of survival. For instance, there are children who remember previous lives. This was studied by Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia for more than 50 years.___Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.___It's amazing research. He went all over the world, especially in the East, and collected all these case studies, all these stories. In plural, these were data of kids, very young age, who would describe up to 40 items that then he could go and verify.There was no internet. There was really no way the kid could know. Why would the kid say that when I was living in this other body and I was a woman and that's how my house would look like or that's how I would die, right? Again, there is evidence, not proof, but there's evidence not only that something weird and interesting is happening as we cross the threshold, but also when we come back to this life.Scientists should not be afraid of studying this, but they are because there's stigma. There's usually stigma upon the enigma, and this is so unfortunate. And one of the reasons is because of the ideology of materialism, because those things cannot be possible. What is wrong with the politics of science such that they have generated this stigma?So many things. Science is a human activity to begin with.So it falls prey to all our passions and ego and greed. That's one thing. Science is a job for the good and for the bad.You need to get a salary. You need to get grants. Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.And then, we didn't have time to unpack this, but science for many years become entangled, as I was suggesting before, to other -isms, materialism, secularism. So anything that smells like the afterlife, people may think has to do with God, and then they freak out.Anything that suggests that there's something about the mind that may not need a physical material substrate to exist, it smells like non-materialism. So, all these -isms are ideologically blocking that kind of research, and then there are all these sociopolitical constraints as to what should be studied and what shouldn't be studied.I call it the backstage of science. Sometimes we scientists or science communicators seem to speak as if the data is the only thing that matters. We say, well, data and theory.But then there's a third leg of this stool, which is all the politics that goes behind the scenes. And we often don't speak about this, and it's quite vicious and petty, and it's very real. Why is materialism so attractive to most scientists?Well, an easy answer is because we've grown up with it.It's what the educational system promotes, and that's what you hear when you go to university. So it's like growing in a culture. It feels like the air in which you breathe.So it's very hard to begin with to detect, well, maybe there's another alternative. Maybe there are other ways of doing science, other environments in which one could do science. That's one reason.And other reasons maybe are more profound, and I'm not qualified to explain them, but I could say, looking at this 400-year history of science, since it started around 1623 with Galileo's book The Assayer, that science went and coupled with all what's going on in the West.And so the fall of religion, you could say, and science presented us this new alternative that then could be coupled very well with other -isms, and this idea of growth, and then science losing its good twin brother, which was philosophy. There's a whole natural history of science starting as philosophy, kind of emancipating or breaking out from philosophy, and then marrying technology, and then marrying other social systems.From that point of view, materialism is a very convenient idea to propose. There were attempts, like the German idealists tried to do a more romantic science. But no, the idea prevailed, like Francis Bacon said: You should pursue nature through all her corners, he said, and make her spill her secrets.Our attitude towards nature in the science that dominates is very much reflecting how we treat nature in our society, in our culture, like a resource to extract secrets by force and then dominate it. How is materialism related to the notions of growth and progress? What's wrong with having a productive citizenry?This is another very interesting and very difficult question to answer.But there's this recent book coming out by Paul Kingsnorth. In it, he explains this idea of the machine and this idea of progress. And this, again, this conflation of more is better, of we need to go forward always, and convincing us that the way to do that is to continually extract more from nature. But because we don't have the religious context anymore, because God is dead, then what do we have? We have what we can do as humans with our own gadgets.It's kind of the story of the Promethean fire. We will just build anything to make ourselves God.A good example today is transhumanism. Transhumanism is this pseudo-religion dressed in technoscientific language whose goal is very religious. They promise immortality, they promise redemption, they promise transformation of the entire natural world, but it's done by human means through technology. Are you suggesting that we can't have ethics without religion?Well, we should have ethics with or without religion. That's another pruning that has happened in science. We say, forget about aesthetics, although some physicists still think that beautiful means probably true, and forget about politics. We pretend there's no backstage of science, and even let's forget about ethics.___Science needs to be in the service of mankind.___Scientists, when they become more like engineers, they're just thinking how to make things work so that they can go to the moon, go to Mars, make machines that think, but they don't think whether that's a good idea.And also consider metaphysics. Many scientists for a long time pretended, and maybe that comes from the stream of positivisms, that really one doesn't need metaphysics at all, except that materialism is always the metaphysics running the system.You see, it's not just ethics. It's the pruning of all of these, you could say, five main legs of philosophy that just makes a kind of unconscious science, a science that doesn't really know what it's doing. It's doing it very well locally, but it just doesn't know what it's doing globally. Do you think science has to have an ultimate vision and purpose behind it for it to be effective or for it to be meaningful and transformative?Yes, a way I would say that is that science needs to be in the service of mankind. And it hasn't been that. And we can see it through, you know, when we discovered the secrets of the atom, and all of a sudden, the Manhattan Project, and then we create nuclear weapons.And now we're trying to crack how machines may think, and now we're creating this mess, right? So science needs to be in service of mankind, not in service of a few ideas that maybe want to make more money or just dominate upon nature. What about planes, trains, automobiles, and modern medicine? Hasn't science served mankind by helping us develop those technologies?Yes and no. I see where you're going, and it's fair.I came here by plane, and it's a blessing. When I almost died, the surgeons did their job, and they saved my life. But these two forced choices between Luddites and Silicon Valley types, I think, of course, it's a false dichotomy.Progress, in a way, it's good, but we often don't speak about the dark side of the moon. We say the great things that progress has brought, and we don't speak about the disasters, the side effects that it has come with, and the same when we promise new technologies. We tend to think that any technology is great, that email is going to save us so much time because we don't need to write letters and send them anymore.Is that true? I spend so many hours a week writing emails. Let's just say there are great things about it and bad things about it. People like Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, for example, argue that we've made moral progress over time because of the Enlightenment. Do you think that's totally wrong-headed?I think he's emphasizing a side of the moon, and he does that very well, and you can find tons of plots where there's a slope going up and say it's great. But I think he should also tell the not-so-friendly story.But if your ideology is just to resist and continue to explain that the Enlightenment is the best thing ever and reason is the best thing ever… this feels to me like you're worshipping these abstractions.I'm very critical of it and also of these, again, science communicators and scientists that say, Oh, science says, in the name of science, experts say. It's like, come on, let's be careful because we can shoot ourselves in the foot by putting forth to the people an image of science that we know is not really true. Recently there's been a resurgence of spirituality and of people who say that they're spiritual but not religious, especially in the United States. If materialism is going away, what is going to fill that gap? Are we going to return to traditional religion? Do you see that being connected with the rise of the political right?I'm not a fortune teller, so I don't know what's going to happen. But, yeah, we could say we're in this post-materialist age and even post-secular age. One cannot come back to the past, but maybe just to contact with the roots is a good idea.What do I mean by that? I think we need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method. We need to do so in a culture where we realize humans cannot thrive in a vacuum where there's this idea that the sacred has to be removed.Now, how do we do that without bringing in back all the vices of religion? I don't know. I'm from a Catholic country.Here we are in England, so there are differences and interreligious dialogue has always been a challenge. But I think maybe a way of putting it is: after all these conflicts and branchings I was quickly alluding to, science from philosophy and then also from religion, now there's a time of reconciliation perhaps and maybe debates in the proper sense, like exchange of ideas in service of learning and getting into something higher than both poles. We need science to talk to religious people and it's interesting when people say they're spiritual and not religious.I think this is just a way of saying, no, I don't want to go back, I want to go forward. But at the end of the day, religions have offered us practices and grounding that we now desperately need. Everybody can and should just meditate or pray or do whatever they want, but we're in a crisis and it's time for reconciliation. What do you say to critics that say you are merely projecting our need for meaning onto a fundamentally indifferent universe?Yeah, I know that the typical science communicator says something like this. But we're not projecting. Human beings feed on meaning.It's the other way around. If you're a materialist, because the only thing that there is is matter, all that comes next, free will, consciousness, meaning, this is a kind of illusion that we need to explain.They're just craving for meaning, but there isn't really for them. I would also like to remind my materialist friends that for decades, if not centuries, they've said in the name of science, we know that this and this and this doesn't really exist. I think now they sense they're forced to say, well, actually, we don't know. We've been saying, for instance, that there's nothing after you die, and now probably they need to admit that they don't know the answer.___We need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method.___So it's a moment to open up possibilities and also to gently but fiercely critique these claims that I think harm society. If you say in the name of science, get on with it, when your father dies, you'll never see him again. Well, what the F do you know about it? You haven't studied the literature, you haven't had any of those experiences, and basically what you're doing is you're just doing marketing on ideology. This needs to stop. Do you think that it's scarier for some people to entertain the thought that there might be life after death, compared to a materialist worldview where you just die, given that there might be consequences for unsavory behaviour?Well, death and dying is scary. It's maybe the ultimate ending. It's a limit on life, and when we're in this conquest mode, we don't like limits.And it also has, there's a shockwave backwards, so I think if you change your notion of what death is or may be, you live differently. It also has consequences, as you're saying, for the future because this is not our only goal here and we come back in whatever form. And again, different religions would say different things. I the East, they are more happy with the idea of reincarnation, and here in the West, there are other preferences. But in any case, it changes how we live, and that's really what matters.It's not about just projecting or imagining what we'll be after, but how we live now and also how we treat those who are dying. So it goes from the individual to the families, to the hospitals.Now in the near-death research I do, this has ramifications at all these levels, all the way to society.But our society is thanatophobic. It has a phobia of death. We don't want to hear about death, and this is another thing we need to put on the table and be willing to talk about it. Do you think that we might get closer to answering ultimate questions like why is there anything at all if we jettison materialism?That’s an excellent question, Simon. Two things: we should stop treating reality, I believe, as a great sudoku, as an enigma, as something that with intelligence, money, and time that we will crack and instead treat reality more like a mystery. And what you do for in front of a mystery is not to be the clever guy in a class and say “I’ll solve you” but more like “I will bow and you will transform me.”I know this sounds a bit like a scientist speaking like a mystic. But I think this reorientation is needed. In the end, we won’t crack the big questions, but they will transform us. If we free ourselves from this prison of materialism, the way we will explore these questions will be freer, more creative, and in service of mankind. Do you think exploring mystery is the reason why we are here?I think we are here because, and this pseudo-theological argument I’m making off the cuff, But the One, the Absolute, if there is such a thing, had everything except limitation. We are that absolute experiencing that contingency. It’s like an act of divine proprioception. It’s a wonderful adventure, it’s just incredible to be alive. Perhaps we have forgotten why we are here and the whole point is to experience the flesh.Let me end by saying this. I criticize materialism harshly. I bang on this dead horse, because I think it’s dead. But matter is a great mystery. So maybe my invitation is as follows: hey materialist friends, come here, let’s work on materialism 2.0! Consciousness is a mystery, but matter is also a mystery. The fact that we can have an intersubjective experience consensus, the fact that we can apply mathematics, that we can measure things... the physical world we take for granted, but it is a great mystery too.Maybe that’s related to your last question: why are we here? Why did spirit decide to incarnate? Being in the flesh may be a great thing if spirit decided to do so.Àlex Gómez-Marín, thank you very much.My pleasure.