SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " danger " 1,041 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Breaking down the dire warnings about AI's risks to humanity — and what experts says should be done about it
A dire warning from an outgoing researcher at Anthropic that AI could "kill all humans" by the end of the decade led to public outcry over the dangers posed by the technology's rapid development. It's raised questions about why some experts believe AI poses such an extreme risk, and how it could lead to the demise of humanity.
Obama Urges Democrats to Move A.I. Oversight to the Center of Their Agenda
During a private fund-raiser, the former president warned that the technology could be “dangerous” if not managed urgently and with a clear plan.
Biologists drove 19 burrowing owls evicted by a Phoenix housing project 50 miles into a 10,000-acre solar complex and lowered them into 40 plastic burrows — every female laid eggs within a month, and 29 chicks fledged the first summer, because open ground under panels hides no predator from an owl
A solar farm designed to fight climate change became an unexpected refuge for an endangered owl when scientists discovered that panels cast the perfect shadow for ground-nesting predators to hunt.
No-Danger Ranger, Red Sox beat Royals 5-1
Were you worried about Ranger Suárez coming into this afternoon’s game? It’s okay to admit it if you were. Hell, it’s okay to still be worried a tad. The man put up a 5.70 ERA in the month of August, culminating in a no-show performance against the Yankees in what was the biggest series of […]
UNDP warns Russian drone attacks on Chernobyl endangers the health and safety of millions
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) administrator Alexander De Croo on Thursday warned in an interview that frequent drone attacks on Chernobyl are 'really gambling with the safety of millions...
Single California condor mother gets help raising her chick
After coming back from the brink of extinction in the 1980s, the birds are still considered critically endangered.
Tigers seek second straight series win against Rockies on Saturday
The Detroit Tigers won their second game in a row for the first time since early August with a 6-2 victory over the Colorado Rockies at Comerica Park on Friday night. Riley Greene’s 3-for-4 performance fueled the good guys on offense and dodged danger on several occasions for a quality start while earning his 10th […]
The politics and possibilities of ‘AI could kill us all’
I found myself fielding a lot of questions from folks who don’t usually talk much about AI this week. They were mostly along the lines of “do you think AI is going to kill us all?” or “how worried should I be about this human extinction stuff?” Motivating this wave of existential anxiety was the highly dramatic resignation of now-former Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon, who quit his job while publicly sharing his concerns about safety practices at the leading AI companies. More specifically, he declared that almost everyone at OpenAI and Anthropic, the leading AI labs, believes that there’s a decent chance the AI systems they’re producing could “kill us all” by the end of the decade, and the companies aren’t “acting responsibly.” Other AI safety researchers, including those still employed at Anthropic and OpenAI, all confirmed that yes, Coxon is correct, they’re all worried that their company’s products might prove fatal for the entire human race as well. Two more AI employees quit and joined the chorus. Now, the warning shot has been covered everywhere from the Wall Street Journal to Fox News to WIRED to the Guardian. I understand why all this sounds scary, but my response to those who have asked, has generally been: No, you don’t need to worry that AI will kill go rogue and kill us all. But that does not mean we shouldn’t worry, period. Far from it. The companies building AI products are now among the wealthiest and most powerful entities in the world. And they very much are building enormous engines of mass surveillance, extraction, and automation. They can and have allowed their AI systems to carry out felony hacks of other companies, provided the government with autonomously generated kill lists, and sold enterprise technology to firms around the world that is explicitly intended to replace jobs. But “AI” has done these things not because they have all-powerful minds of their own but, ultimately, because people have programmed, calibrated, and directed them to. In other words, it’s not AI we need to worry the most about. It’s the people and corporations working to profit from and gain power by deploying it. The technology is sophisticated, sure, and, especially in cybersecurity contexts, potentially disruptive to plenty of existing systems. But if we want to stop this predatory, profiteering, and extractive form of AI—and it’s worth noting that at this point, most people do—we absolutely can. A quick note/plea: I can only do all of this with the support of readers like you, so if you find value in independent, critical tech journalism and analysis, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. I want to keep as much of this un-paywalled as absolutely possible, and I need your support to do so. Many thanks to all who continue to chip in, it’s very much appreciated. Onward. Subscribe First, some context: AI industry folks like Coxon have been discussing the prospect that AI will destroy humanity for years. Even before the beginning of the AI boom, many working in the industry, from the executive staff to the rank and file researchers, have obsessed over ‘x-risk’, or the possibility that AI will become sentient or semi-sentient and move one way or another to exterminate humanity. This is ostensibly why Elon Musk bankrolled OpenAI in the first place, and is the grounds for his lawsuit alleging OpenAI betrayed its charter by abandoning its nonprofit status to become a commercial enterprise. Many AI engineers and startup founders have calculated their own personal p(doom), or the probability that the tech product they are working on will initiate an actual humanity-extinguishing apocalypse. 10-25% p(doom)s are pretty common. (I wrote about a long weekend I spent among these folks at one of their top conferences here, to give you an idea of their ideas and belief systems.) Sam Altman himself drove the narrative of the imminent rise of a super-powerful AI, or artificial general intelligence, to prominence by declaring that the technology he was building posed an existential risk to humanity. This idea is in other words baked into the DNA of modern AI companies and into the products they engineer. It’s also why the industry is routinely accused, by myself and others, of “doom marketing,” ie, using such proclamations and framings to impart the sheer power of the technology behind your product onto investors, partners, consumers, and the state. Some ambient understanding of this tendency may have helped prevent the press from repeating the claim every time one of the x-risk folks made it over the years, including when they quit their jobs at AI companies while doing so. Yet Coxon’s AI x-risk alarm has broken containment, as they say, and has exposed the idea to the mainstream media once again. This has happened, I think, for a number of reasons. First, when AI CEOs were going around saying AI might kill everyone in 2023, their companies were well-capitalized, but not nearly to the extent they are today. They were more easily dismissed as eccentric geeks of the sort that Silicon Valley is supposed to produce. Now, not only do their products have much greater market saturation, but people are more aware of a) the often unethical ways the executives and companies comport themselves b) the other adverse impacts of AI that have already arrived, and c) the physical cost of building these systems, particularly when it comes to data centers. Finally, toss in the constant stream of headlines in 2026 about AI models going rogue or potentially upending the world’s infrastructure. [ ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) [ With the backlash to data centers, Flock and AI glasses, a mass opposition to big tech is underway. Silicon Valley is in denial. ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) Brian Merchant · Aug 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) As a result, general sentiment was already overwhelmingly skeptical of AI and its overlords, so the table was pretty well set for someone to come along and say ‘just a reminder, the companies that are building the product that promises to take your job and leave a data center in your neighborhood also think that it might exterminate the human race’ and get a strong reaction from the media and the public. The question is: Should we understand this stuff as hype, strategically fanned to feed already swelling valuations? Is it doom marketing? Genuine cause for alarm that the infrastructure that undergirds modern life is facing a novel threat vector? Or reason to be sincerely worried that AI companies are amassing too much power, and that their products are genuinely dangerous? The answer, I’m afraid, is “yes.” Let me try to untangle all of this a bit, because arguments over how to navigate this moment are extremely heated right now, as they are essentially arguments over how to approach the politics of AI at a moment where there may be a unique opening for action. Those sympathetic to AI alignment concerns and x risk arguments—which increasingly includes a faction on the left who want to shut down AI over safety concerns—argue that people who dismiss AI as all hype have their heads in the sand. Meanwhile, critics of the x-risk narrative—which I might note includes a cadre of investors and tech folks on the right, too—argue that it is hype and can be used to further inflate valuations or for pursuing regulatory capture. The challenge is that many feel that dismissing AI as just hype or purely marketing also diminishes the urgency of taking on the AI industry as the novel and threat to labor, civil society, and the public sphere it is; others that by accepting the industry’s own terms, we imbue it with undue power and enable it. But let’s be clear: Declarations that AI is so powerful it might end the world are a kind of marketing, and anyone who says otherwise is just as off base as those who say that’s all that it is. If you don’t think that these sub-trillion dollar companies have higher-ups who noticed that when their founders talked about super-powerful dangerous AI they got spikes in media interest and phone calls from investors, or that those founders didn’t notice that themselves, and lean into certain narratives to advantage their products, then I don’t know what to tell you. Not all marketing is a Pepsi ad campaign with a celebrity spokesperson. Yet confronting the AI industry should certainly be considered an urgent project. Do I share the x-riskers’ fear that out-of-control, super-intelligent AI agents might end the world? I do not. I’ve read a good deal of AI extinction literature over the last couple of years and I have not come across a credible, step-by-step documentation of how exactly AI might move from self-recursively improving AI to killing every single human on the planet. Most of what I’ve read seems predicated on a sort of reverse Ian Malcolmian logic: Eventually, it becomes smart enough and AI, uh, finds a way (to exterminate humanity). Are the AI companies also overstating and dramatizing what their products can do? Yes, pretty much all the time. They’re in a knife fight for market share and are trying to win customers and government contracts before their investors come knocking. And yet. They have concentrated enormous amounts of compute, have extensive data collection and surveillance capacities, have inserted themselves into the state in numerous capacities, including military kill chains, and they are being run by egomaniacal billionaires who are rushing to monopolize an entire new market. The way I think about their most recent frightening-seeming exploits is not as a “swarm of rogue AI agents building a new civilization” or whatever, but as corporations with a hitherto-unimaginable amount of compute at their disposal recklessly experimenting with automation programs, completely unafraid of any repercussions because we have been unwilling or unable to impose any on them. So I think we should welcome any newfound imperative to hold them accountable. I also think that ultimately, the AI critics, Pause AI folks, leftists, doomers, effective altruists, and, honestly, most of the public, want a lot of the same things: legitimate checks and limits on AI companies’ power, actual transparency into what the companies are doing, and for more of AI to be under public control. (Ultimately, a lot of what animates the x-risk fears are rooted in just that: a fear of losing control.) How we move towards all this, exactly, is the question of the day, and while there’s much to be argued over in terms of building a viable political platform to challenge the AI industry’s power, I do want to cast a vote against one particular approach. Not to pick on Chris here, as there are a lot of folks out there proposing stuff like this, and the policy ideas actually stem from AI safety groups. But not only would this be challenging to land politically (I can already hear the ‘China will beat us to AGI’ calls) and all but unworkable in practice, this approach is a) far too limiting, b) fails to address the current harms caused by AI and c) would likely only wind up serving Anthropic and OpenAI; it’s what regulatory capture looks like in action. Full model transparency is the floor for what should be on offer here. If these companies believe their products will kill us, the very least we deserve is to know how. It’s in the public interest. I would also argue we might get a lot of the way to stopping any currently envisioned robot apocalypse simply by forcing AI companies to assume liability, and to submit to the full brunt of the law. If Sam Altman were liable to be charged with a felony for approving the hack on Hugging Face1, if Google was forced to pay defamation fines each time it published a false and injurious AI Overviews, these companies might suddenly find cause to restrain their models’ output, and we might hear less about rogue AI. We would need to introduce new frameworks and available tools for tracking automated lawbreaking, to be sure, but I’d wager that little would frighten the AI companies more than actually being held accountable for what their products enable. To that end, Illinois has passed an AI liability law, which the industry fought tooth and nail, and Florida is considering one. The next steps would be towards moving AI under public control; again, it’s only reasonable, since everyone, not just AI insiders, should get a say over how a technology whose developers say might kill us is developed and deployed. Dismantling the whole industrial project as currently structured should be on the table, too, pending democratic input. But that’s for another post. For now, suffice to say that while I won’t be losing any sleep about an AI-enabled extinction event, Mr. Coxon and co. have given us an opportunity to underscore the urgency of the clear and present damage AI companies are doing, the extreme power they wield and the extent to which they hold themselves unaccountable, and the abundance of political capital there is out there for taking them on. Subscribe 1 Purely speculative! I do not know if he did or not.
Homeless woman tries to torch $250K Mercedes as new NYC camp turns ‘dangerous’: business owner
A homeless woman tried to torch a luxury SUV outside a high end lighting business in Manhattan -- one of several terrifying encounters workers say they have endured after the resurgence of a West...
Science Agencies Pull ‘Political Interference’ Protections From Scientific Integrity Policies
NSF and the Department of Commerce have scrubbed references to the dangers of political interference in science from official agency policy documents.
Who Benefits from Apocalyptic Claims About AI?
Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon quit and posted at X last Tuesday, to over 25 million views, that “No other human activity poses this level of danger.”
Data Center Boom Brings Health Hazards, Former EPA Officials Warn
Experts warn of dangers from fossil fuel expansion and federal carveouts for the AI industry.
These Endangered Raccoons Started Making Their Own Toys and Scientists Think They Learned From Each Other
Two young raccoons turned discarded paper into balls.
For China, a Mock A.I. Attack on WeChat Signals a Dangerous New Era
The demonstration of a potent cyberweapon has exposed China’s vulnerabilities and added to the urgency of A.I. safety talks between Beijing and Washington.
Anthropic says it blocked possible efforts to use AI for biological weapons development, Iran-linked cases
The company detailed five cases involving potentially dangerous biological research, saying it banned the associated accounts and strengthened its safeguards.
Down in the Polls, Republicans Embrace a Familiar Tool: Fear
At an unusual midterm gathering, President Trump and his allies painted Democrats as dangerously un-American.
Kratom ban meets quiet compliance as retailers clear shelves
Kratom was classified as a Schedule I drug on Aug. 28, as Gov. Maura Healey's administration sounded the alarm about the unregulated products that can lead to dangerous health effects. Inspectors fanned out across the state as the order went into effect to check for compliance.
The trapdoor spiders giving a leg up to science
WA's trapdoor spiders are endangered. Jackson Rendall is here to help—because he thinks they're "just really cool."
Viewpoint: Unlocking Europe’s wildfire data
Europe is already investing in the science, technology and infrastructure needed to understand, prevent and fight wildfires. Copernicus provides satellite-based Earth observation and environmental information, while the European Forest Fire Information System provides information on fire danger and forest fires across Europe. Weather and climate systems add forecasts of heat, drought, wind and humidity; historical fire databases show where fires have occurred; and researchers generate increasingly detailed knowledge about fuels, fire behaviour, forecasting, modelling and risk management. Meanwhile, new European research projects are adding digital twins and other tools to this growing ecosystem.However, these data do not necessarily sit together, nor are they necessarily described, structured or governed in ways that allow them to be used together. Much of the information is public, but some is commercially held. Some is sensitive. Some is subject to legal, security or operational restrictions. Even when data can be legally accessed, different systems may use different formats, terminology and rules.Europe therefore faces an unusual paradox: we have vast amounts of relevant information to respond to the wildfire challenge, but not the means to bring it together. For example, a wildfire researcher or emergency service might need to ask whether a particular combination of vegetation, drought, wind and topography has historically been associated with rapid fire spread. The relevant information may exist in several institutions, using different systems and subject to different conditions of access.The challenge is to conduct an authorised analysis that interacts with these sources, combines the results and respects the rules imposed by each data custodian.An important part of the answer can be found in the Fair principles, the idea that data should be findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. Developed more than a decade ago, these principles have become a central reference point for modern data stewardship, making it easier for people and machines to find data, understand what it means and determine whether it can be reused.Readability by machines is essential, since AI systems will be key to meeting the data challenge. Bring analysis to the dataThe proposition is not to give an AI system unrestricted access to sensitive databases. Quite the opposite. The goal is to make it possible for approved algorithms to go to the data, rather than requiring sensitive data or large datasets to be copied to wherever the analysis happens.Imagine an analysis asking a series of questions of different data stations. At one station it might examine weather and climate data; at another, historical fire records; at another, experimental measurements of fire behaviour. The algorithm does not need to download everything. It can operate within the environment permitted by each data custodian and return only the results that the rules allow to leave.This is sometimes described as data visiting, and related approaches already exist in areas such as federated analysis and federated learning.Sensitive data should therefore not be treated as a free-for-all for machines. This requires appropriate governance at multiple levels. Access needs to be authenticated and authorised. The purpose of an analysis should be defined. The code or model being run should be controlled. Data custodians should be able to specify what can be queried and what results can leave their environment. Activities should be auditable and human oversight should remain where the consequences require it.In other words, the objective is not to trust AI with the data. It is to design systems in which AI never has more access than it needs.As open as possible, as closed as necessaryFair data should also not be confused with open data. Some wildfire data should be openly available. Other information may legitimately need to remain restricted because it concerns critical infrastructure, security, commercial interests, privacy or operational capabilities. The principle should be: as open as possible, as closed as necessary.The important point is that restricted data should not automatically become unusable data. If machines can discover what information exists, understand its meaning, establish where it came from and determine the conditions under which it can be used, authorised analyses can potentially be carried out without the underlying data ever leaving the environment in which it is protected.Restricted data can still be Fair and machine-actionable.This is also an important question of data sovereignty. European institutions should not have to surrender control of their data to a handful of technology platforms in order to benefit from AI. Nor does Europe need to start again by building one giant repository for every piece of wildfire information. The better approach is to connect what already exists.This is the principle behind emerging approaches such as Tryangle, developed through the Leiden Initiative for Fair and Equitable Science. Rather than creating another centralised data warehouse, the approach seeks to provide an interoperable layer through which approved algorithms can visit distributed data sources while respecting the rules of their custodians.In this way, a data station can remain where it is. Its custodians can retain control. Existing databases and applications do not have to be abandoned. What changes is their ability to communicate with other systems through common, machine-readable descriptions, access rules and interoperability mechanisms.But approaches like this need data that meets the Fair principles. Only then can an interoperable ecosystem safely begin to turn fragmented information into collective intelligence.Data infrastructure is wildfire infrastructureThe implications of this approach are entirely practical. Firefighters could gain better intelligence about local and evolving risks. Land managers could test prevention strategies using more comprehensive information about fuels, weather and past fires. Researchers could compare evidence across ecosystems without repeatedly moving huge datasets between institutions. Smaller regions and resource-constrained teams could access analytical capabilities without having to build large data infrastructures themselves.Europe is already investing heavily in satellites, databases, research programmes, forecasting systems and scientific expertise. The question is whether we will connect those investments well enough to turn them into actionable intelligence.That requires policymakers and funders to treat data infrastructure as seriously as physical infrastructure. Data generated or supported through European public funding should be Fair, verifiable and machine actionable by design, wherever legally and ethically possible.Related articlesData Corner: Europe’s burning need for wildfire mitigation researchClimate monitoring must remain a global enterprise, experts sayIn practice, that means funding not only the production of data, but also the infrastructure that makes data usable across systems: metadata, provenance, interoperability, access mechanisms and governance. Where data must remain restricted, we should ensure that it can still be securely discovered, verified and used for authorised analysis.Initiatives such as the European Open Science Cloud offer an existing framework through which these principles can be put into practice. What is needed now is to accelerate implementation and make them a standard part of how Europe funds and builds research and innovation systems.We do not need another generation of disconnected databases. The data is already there. The opportunity is to make it work together, securely, responsibly and quickly enough to help prevent the next fire, rather than simply document the last one.Jean-Claude Burgelman is professor emeritus at the Free University of Brussels (VUB) and editor-in-chief at Frontiers Policy Lab. For more than 20 years he held leading roles in research and innovation policy at the European Commission.
Anthropic researcher's resignation sends warning about the dangers of AI development
Jacob Coxon, who said he spent three years doing research at both Anthropic and OpenAI, said Tuesday on the social platform X that the two AI companies are more focused on beating each other and global competitors in developing the most advanced model possible than they are on safety.
Southern California braces for, 'very dangerous and unusual heat' -- plus oppressive humidity
Sweltering heat and higher than normal humidity is causing dangerous conditions for Southern Californians on Wednesday.
A Nazi-curious party just won big in Germany. The White House approves.
How a very dangerous state election in Germany helps reveal Trump’s real foreign policy.
INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS: NOAA Fisheries takes a ‘sharp turn away from science’
The agency’s focus on commercial interests threatens fisheries science and over one million miles of protected marine habitats. By Johnny Sturgeon, Inside Climate News This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here. In July, the Trump administration relegated endangered leatherback turtles, sea lions and whales to mere collateral damage in its race to profit from the oceans. Now, fisheries science is in […]
Ben Roethlisberger raises concern over Steelers thin running back room
Former Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger questioned team's roster construction, warning that depth behind the primary running backs is dangerously thin.
The Cost of Cutting American Science: How Federal Cuts Diminish Public Health Capacity
Among the federal government’s many responsibilities is the work it does to protect public health. Federal agencies monitor our food supply to ensure safety, conduct research to better understand emerging health threats, provide funding for public health programs in communities and work to detect and respond to disease outbreaks. Americans rely on these efforts every day—in a 2024 online survey, 74% of respondents said that “if the federal government issued safety guidance about food you eat regularly,” they would follow it. Changes to Federal Public Health Capacity The Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the federal government have resulted in significant impacts on our nation’s public health capacity over the past 20 months, affecting the response to health concerns such as measles, Ebola and cyclosporiasis. Agencies with core public health, food safety and disease prevention responsibilities experienced large workforce decreases during the first year of the administration. At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for instance, the workforce in February 2026 was 26.7% smaller than in September 2024 before the start of the Trump administration. The Food and Drug Administration saw a similarly steep decline of 21.6%. Agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and Food Safety and Inspection Service also experienced large workforce decreases. (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); Changes can also be seen in crucial public health occupations. The number of federal food inspectors, for example, decreased by more than half between September 2024 and February 2026, going from 1,035 to 473. This is the lowest number of food inspectors employed by the federal government since at least 2005. By February 2026, there were also 33.3% fewer federal public health program specialists, whose work includes advising federal funding recipients on public health activities and analyzing the effectiveness of public health programs. Government’s capacity is diminished as employees with specialized knowledge and experience in protecting the public and responding to health risks depart, leaving agencies less prepared to carry out their public health missions. There also have been vacancies in critical high-level leadership positions at public health agencies, most notably at the CDC, which had a permanent Senate-confirmed director for less than a month between January 2025 and early August 2026. Although the CDC has previously been led by acting directors at the start of an administration, the nearly yearlong gap since the departure of the administration’s first permanent director in August 2025 is without precedent. As of August 2026, the FDA is also currently without a Senate-confirmed commissioner following the previous commissioner’s resignation in May 2026. Additionally, public health agencies are experiencing increased politicization of their leadership ranks. In agencies such as the CDC and Food Safety and Inspection Service, the number of individuals in the Senior Executive Service—the most senior career leaders in government—has declined significantly, while at the same time the number of political appointees has reached record levels. (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); At the CDC, for example, the number of career SES decreased 42.9% between December 2024 and February 2026, while the number of non-Senate confirmed political appointees at the agency was six times larger than the agency’s historical average from 2009 and 2024. Knowledgeable career leaders are integral to the ability of public health agencies to carry out their work with scientific integrity and professional judgment, and rapid leadership turnover and increased politicization threaten agencies’ ability to make evidence-based decisions to protect our health. The upheaval and politicization in public health agencies have also negatively affected employee engagement. Strong employee engagement is crucial to the ability of agencies to carry out their mission and successfully provide essential services to the public. In the 2025 Public Service Viewpoint Survey conducted by the Partnership for Public Service, the Department of Health and Human Services—which encompasses major public health agencies such as the CDC and FDA—had an employee engagement and satisfaction score of 20.4 out of 100, one of the lowest among large agencies. Only 2.8% of HHS employees indicated trust in their political leaders and only 8.7% reported confidence that they could report a suspected violation of law or regulation without retaliation. Employees at HHS also reported that the agency’s ability to provide services to the public had suffered. Nearly half of employees at HHS, 47.5%, said their work unit was worse at delivering quality services compared to its performance in 2024. In addition, 57.8% said their work unit was performing worse at fulfilling stakeholder needs. In addition to the work done within federal agencies, the federal government also distributes significant funding for public health and disease prevention work to state and local governments, nonprofits and small businesses—funding which has been significantly disrupted. At the CDC, for example, there was a 71.9% decrease in the amount of project grant funding issued in fiscal year 2025 compared to fiscal year 2024. The FDA also issued far less funding in fiscal year 2025—a 21.3% decrease from its fiscal year 2024 funding. Changes in federal funding include the ending of grants to community organizations that worked on HIV prevention and the cancellation of funding for research into improvements to patient safety and healthcare quality. These changes go beyond federal agencies to impact the broader public health ecosystem, including the state and local health departments responsible for much of the on-the-ground public health work in their communities. About 80% of the CDC’s domestic funding is directed towards state and local partners—meaning that cuts to CDC funding can ultimately result in cuts to state and local public health capacity. Federal agencies also provide expertise and assistance to state and local health agencies as they deal with particular health challenges, but workforce cuts have resulted in fewer federal employees available to help. The Impact of Changes to Public Health Capacity These changes to federal public health capacity are not abstract concerns. Disrupted programs, reduced funding and lost expertise at public health agencies across all levels of government threaten the public’s physical well-being and safety. In some cases, this has already led to harm. The most immediate impacts of federal cuts were seen in interruptions to ongoing public health programs and crisis responses. In one instance, when CDC grants were canceled during the 2025 Texas measles outbreak—the most severe measles outbreak in 25 years—public health officials in Lubbock, Texas were forced to pause parts of their measles response work supported by the frozen funding. Lubbock’s director of public health further said that a lack of available CDC experts to reach out to for advice “definitely” impacted the department’s response to the measles crisis. Cuts to federal funding also forced Dallas County Health and Human Services to cut staff and cancel 50 community vaccination clinics during the outbreak. Public health work outside of major outbreak responses was also disrupted. For example, in April 2025, the Milwaukee Public Health Department was unexpectedly unable to reach experts on lead poisoning due to firings at the CDC when responding to concerns about lead contamination in Milwaukee public schools. Due to federal workforce cuts, several programs at the CDC, including Alzheimer’s and epilepsy programs, have also become trapped in limbo—existing on paper, but without the staff necessary to operate. More recent crises reveal how federal cuts have weakened the public health infrastructure needed to prevent and respond to dangerous new outbreaks. Internationally, cuts at the U.S. Agency for International Development eliminated funding for disease testing and contact tracing abroad, which delayed detection of and responses to the 2026 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. While international outbreaks may seem far removed, the unchecked spread of disease in any country can quickly pose a danger to economic well-being, security and health around the world. Within the United States, public health cuts inhibited responses to the summer 2026 outbreak of the food-borne parasite cyclospora. At the federal level, cuts to funding for lab equipment and for CDC staff with expertise in parasitic infections—including 9 out of 11 staff members at the lab responsible for identifying parasitic outbreaks in 2025— contributed to the largest reporting delay in outbreak cases at the CDC in 15 years. Conflicting communications from the FDA about the source of the outbreak, which followed cuts to the agency’s communications department, additionally led to confusion among the public about how to best avoid infection. At the same time, cuts to HHS funding and support for local and state public health slowed some health departments’ responses to the crisis. The exact costs of these delays, constraints and confusion in public health responses are difficult to estimate. However, their message is clear: federal cuts have already made containing threats to public health even more of a challenge. Conclusion Protecting public health—from food safety to disease prevention—is one of the federal government’s most important missions. Dramatic and haphazard cuts to federal agencies and funding have already disrupted the public health system, impacting the response to challenges such as measles, lead poisoning and cyclosporiasis. The U.S. public health system needed improvement before these disruptions. Since 2022, federal leadership and coordination in response to public health outbreaks has been on the Government Accountability Office’s High-Risk List of areas in need of attention to improve government effectiveness and efficiency. Recent cuts only compound these concerns. The chaotic dismantling of government and resulting disruptions to crucial functions like public health and disease prevention highlight the need for meaningful reform and concrete policy proposals to reimagine how government can better serve the public and be more effective, responsive and accountable. To learn more about the impact of federal cuts to public health and science more broadly, visit The Cost of Cutting American Science. Learn more For more information on the Partnership for Public Service’s government reform initiative, visit Government for a New Era. View here In line with The Cost of Cutting American Science, federal workforce data in this brief is as of February 2026
The Cost of Cutting American Science: How Federal Cuts Diminish Public Health Capacity
Among the federal government’s many responsibilities is the work it does to protect public health. Federal agencies monitor our food supply to ensure safety, conduct research to better understand emerging health threats, provide funding for public health programs in communities and work to detect and respond to disease outbreaks. Americans rely on these efforts every day—in a 2024 online survey, 74% of respondents said that “if the federal government issued safety guidance about food you eat regularly,” they would follow it. Changes to Federal Public Health Capacity The Trump administration’s efforts to reshape the federal government have resulted in significant impacts on our nation’s public health capacity over the past 20 months, affecting the response to health concerns such as measles, Ebola and cyclosporiasis. Agencies with core public health, food safety and disease prevention responsibilities experienced large workforce decreases during the first year of the administration. At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for instance, the workforce in February 2026 was 26.7% smaller than in September 2024 before the start of the Trump administration. The Food and Drug Administration saw a similarly steep decline of 21.6%. Agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and Food Safety and Inspection Service also experienced large workforce decreases. (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); Changes can also be seen in crucial public health occupations. The number of federal food inspectors, for example, decreased by more than half between September 2024 and February 2026, going from 1,035 to 473. This is the lowest number of food inspectors employed by the federal government since at least 2005. By February 2026, there were also 33.3% fewer federal public health program specialists, whose work includes advising federal funding recipients on public health activities and analyzing the effectiveness of public health programs. Government’s capacity is diminished as employees with specialized knowledge and experience in protecting the public and responding to health risks depart, leaving agencies less prepared to carry out their public health missions. There also have been vacancies in critical high-level leadership positions at public health agencies, most notably at the CDC, which had a permanent Senate-confirmed director for less than a month between January 2025 and early August 2026. Although the CDC has previously been led by acting directors at the start of an administration, the nearly yearlong gap since the departure of the administration’s first permanent director in August 2025 is without precedent. As of August 2026, the FDA is also currently without a Senate-confirmed commissioner following the previous commissioner’s resignation in May 2026. Additionally, public health agencies are experiencing increased politicization of their leadership ranks. In agencies such as the CDC and Food Safety and Inspection Service, the number of individuals in the Senior Executive Service—the most senior career leaders in government—has declined significantly, while at the same time the number of political appointees has reached record levels. (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); (function(){function e(){window.addEventListener(`message`,function(e){if(e.data[`datawrapper-height`]!==void 0){var t=document.querySelectorAll(`iframe`);for(var n in e.data[`datawrapper-height`])for(var r=0,i;i=t[r];r++)if(i.contentWindow===e.source){var a=e.data[`datawrapper-height`][n]+`px`;i.style.height=a}}})}e()})(); At the CDC, for example, the number of career SES decreased 42.9% between December 2024 and February 2026, while the number of non-Senate confirmed political appointees at the agency was six times larger than the agency’s historical average from 2009 and 2024. Knowledgeable career leaders are integral to the ability of public health agencies to carry out their work with scientific integrity and professional judgment, and rapid leadership turnover and increased politicization threaten agencies’ ability to make evidence-based decisions to protect our health. The upheaval and politicization in public health agencies have also negatively affected employee engagement. Strong employee engagement is crucial to the ability of agencies to carry out their mission and successfully provide essential services to the public. In the 2025 Public Service Viewpoint Survey conducted by the Partnership for Public Service, the Department of Health and Human Services—which encompasses major public health agencies such as the CDC and FDA—had an employee engagement and satisfaction score of 20.4 out of 100, one of the lowest among large agencies. Only 2.8% of HHS employees indicated trust in their political leaders and only 8.7% reported confidence that they could report a suspected violation of law or regulation without retaliation. Employees at HHS also reported that the agency’s ability to provide services to the public had suffered. Nearly half of employees at HHS, 47.5%, said their work unit was worse at delivering quality services compared to its performance in 2024. In addition, 57.8% said their work unit was performing worse at fulfilling stakeholder needs. In addition to the work done within federal agencies, the federal government also distributes significant funding for public health and disease prevention work to state and local governments, nonprofits and small businesses—funding which has been significantly disrupted. At the CDC, for example, there was a 71.9% decrease in the amount of project grant funding issued in fiscal year 2025 compared to fiscal year 2024. The FDA also issued far less funding in fiscal year 2025—a 21.3% decrease from its fiscal year 2024 funding. Changes in federal funding include the ending of grants to community organizations that worked on HIV prevention and the cancellation of funding for research into improvements to patient safety and healthcare quality. These changes go beyond federal agencies to impact the broader public health ecosystem, including the state and local health departments responsible for much of the on-the-ground public health work in their communities. About 80% of the CDC’s domestic funding is directed towards state and local partners—meaning that cuts to CDC funding can ultimately result in cuts to state and local public health capacity. Federal agencies also provide expertise and assistance to state and local health agencies as they deal with particular health challenges, but workforce cuts have resulted in fewer federal employees available to help. The Impact of Changes to Public Health Capacity These changes to federal public health capacity are not abstract concerns. Disrupted programs, reduced funding and lost expertise at public health agencies across all levels of government threaten the public’s physical well-being and safety. In some cases, this has already led to harm. The most immediate impacts of federal cuts were seen in interruptions to ongoing public health programs and crisis responses. In one instance, when CDC grants were canceled during the 2025 Texas measles outbreak—the most severe measles outbreak in 25 years—public health officials in Lubbock, Texas were forced to pause parts of their measles response work supported by the frozen funding. Lubbock’s director of public health further said that a lack of available CDC experts to reach out to for advice “definitely” impacted the department’s response to the measles crisis. Cuts to federal funding also forced Dallas County Health and Human Services to cut staff and cancel 50 community vaccination clinics during the outbreak. Public health work outside of major outbreak responses was also disrupted. For example, in April 2025, the Milwaukee Public Health Department was unexpectedly unable to reach experts on lead poisoning due to firings at the CDC when responding to concerns about lead contamination in Milwaukee public schools. Due to federal workforce cuts, several programs at the CDC, including Alzheimer’s and epilepsy programs, have also become trapped in limbo—existing on paper, but without the staff necessary to operate. More recent crises reveal how federal cuts have weakened the public health infrastructure needed to prevent and respond to dangerous new outbreaks. Internationally, cuts at the U.S. Agency for International Development eliminated funding for disease testing and contact tracing abroad, which delayed detection of and responses to the 2026 Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. While international outbreaks may seem far removed, the unchecked spread of disease in any country can quickly pose a danger to economic well-being, security and health around the world. Within the United States, public health cuts inhibited responses to the summer 2026 outbreak of the food-borne parasite cyclospora. At the federal level, cuts to funding for lab equipment and for CDC staff with expertise in parasitic infections—including 9 out of 11 staff members at the lab responsible for identifying parasitic outbreaks in 2025— contributed to the largest reporting delay in outbreak cases at the CDC in 15 years. Conflicting communications from the FDA about the source of the outbreak, which followed cuts to the agency’s communications department, additionally led to confusion among the public about how to best avoid infection. At the same time, cuts to HHS funding and support for local and state public health slowed some health departments’ responses to the crisis. The exact costs of these delays, constraints and confusion in public health responses are difficult to estimate. However, their message is clear: federal cuts have already made containing threats to public health even more of a challenge. Conclusion Protecting public health—from food safety to disease prevention—is one of the federal government’s most important missions. Dramatic and haphazard cuts to federal agencies and funding have already disrupted the public health system, impacting the response to challenges such as measles, lead poisoning and cyclosporiasis. The U.S. public health system needed improvement before these disruptions. Since 2022, federal leadership and coordination in response to public health outbreaks has been on the Government Accountability Office’s High-Risk List of areas in need of attention to improve government effectiveness and efficiency. Recent cuts only compound these concerns. The chaotic dismantling of government and resulting disruptions to crucial functions like public health and disease prevention highlight the need for meaningful reform and concrete policy proposals to reimagine how government can better serve the public and be more effective, responsive and accountable. To learn more about the impact of federal cuts to public health and science more broadly, visit The Cost of Cutting American Science. Learn more For more information on the Partnership for Public Service’s government reform initiative, visit Government for a New Era. View here In line with The Cost of Cutting American Science, federal workforce data in this brief is as of February 2026
California sanctions insurer after it cut assisted living coverage to thousands
State regulators found eight violations after Health Net's abrupt benefit cuts endangered vulnerable Medi-Cal patients.
Slime Molds and a double Ig Nobel Prize winner and a big, great science adventure
” ‘This is dangerous’: slime moulds and the bitter debate over the nature of intelligence — Scientists are battling over whether supposedly simple organisms should be considered ‘intelligent’…
A path toward justice and public safety
Strangulation can be one of the most dangerous forms of assault; despite the lack of visible ailments it is accompanied by. Though strangulation leaves no broken bones, bruises or visible wounds, it is one of the strongest predictors of future homicides for domestic violence victims. Until this year, second-degree assault by strangulation was not classified […]
Anthropic researcher quit, says AI labs are 'gambling with our lives'
An Anthropic researcher who once worked at OpenAI just quit. He's the latest insider warning that the AI race has become dangerously reckless.
Reaction: “Fabio looked dangerous from his first touch”
(in the mixed zone): “He had circulation problems (regarding the substitution of Konstantinos Karetsas, ed.). There had been no sign of it. He went to the hospital for further examinations. It would...
Staff Takeaways: Everton 2-2 Manchester United
Staff Takeaways from Manchester United’s 2-2 outing away to Everton on Sunday Colin: Everything but the finish Manchester United could not finish the job on Sunday. When attacking, they couldn’t finish moves and get the ball to a player in dangerous positions. When defending a lead, they couldn’t assert control to calm the game down […]
Brian and Ellen court danger once again in ‘Outlander: Blood of My Blood’ season 2 exclusive clip
Brian (Jamie Roy) and Ellen (Harriet Slater) find themselves in serious trouble in a clip from ‘Outlander: Blood of My Blood’ season 2 exclusive to ‘Entertainment Weekly.’
Ashley St. Clair and Alex Gibney on AI and the dangers of Elon Musk
A new documentary about Elon Musk uses an AI avatar to simulate an interview with him, using real quotes.
Ashley St. Clair and Alex Gibney on AI and the dangers of Elon Musk
A new documentary about Elon Musk uses an AI avatar to simulate an interview with him, using real quotes | KNSS Radio
Ashley St. Clair and Alex Gibney on AI and the dangers of Elon Musk
A new documentary about Elon Musk uses an AI avatar to simulate an interview with him, using real quotes.
Six decades of politics (but little government)
The first aired episode of “Star Trek,” entitled “The Man Trap,” premiered on September 8, 1966 — 60 years ago today. I’m actually editing a political science fiction issue of The Forum right now, and it’s prompted to me think a lot about the ways that Trek deals with politics and government and what it’s offered us as commentary. The @smotus report is a reader-supported publication. To support this work, please become a paid subscriber. Subscribe The original TV series ran from 1966 to 1969. It had a loyal but modest following, but the audience grew substantially with the series in syndication for years after that. The franchise developed its first motion picture in 1979, followed by five sequels, and then a whole other series of films built around the “Next Generation” series that first aired in 1987. In recent decades, several more TV series have built up around it, including the current “Strange New Worlds,” now in its fourth season. Throughout the past six decades, the franchise has offered us a good many insights into US politics and international relations, although often disguised as science fiction yarns. The original series was largely a Cold War fable, with the United Federation of Planets (a stand-in for the US) perpetually at odds with the Klingon Empire (a stand-in for the USSR). The “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” episode (1969) posited a planet divided into two races, largely indistinguishable to outsiders, but nonetheless constituting a brutal racial hierarchy. “Patterns of Force” (1968) showed a struggling planet where the leader had attempted to construct a benevolent dictatorship — literally Nazism without bigotry — and found that authoritarianism could not exist apart from hierarchy and oppression. (Relatedly, I’d put “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country,” high on a list of dad films about the end of the Cold War, near “The Hunt for Red October.”) Get 20% off for 1 year Indeed, the original series itself was something of a political statement, with a multi-racial crew running the Enterprise, a diverse and largely peaceful Federation mostly free from want and oppression, and protected by Starfleet, an armed force whose scientific mission was at least as important as its military one. Famously, when Nichelle Nichols wanted to walk away from the role of Uhura on the original series, none other than Martin Luther King, Jr. met with her and urged her to remain on the show, discussing the importance of viewers seeing an intelligent Black woman as part of the command team three centuries hence. Later series in the Trek franchise offered a good deal of political commentary on their own, but probably none as explicitly and incisively as “Deep Space Nine,” which ran from 1993 to 1999. The episodes surrounding the Dominion War, especially the “In The Pale Moonlight” (1998), showed the compromises, sacrifices, and moral rot associated with winning even a just war — probably better than any series would until “Andor” (2022-25). In “Far Beyond The Stars” (1998), Captain Benjamin Sisko is somehow transplanted to the role of a science fiction writer in 1950s New York. The writer is frequently sidelined and his ideas stolen because publishers don’t want to credit a Black writer. Several series have depicted the secretive Section 31 — an unacknowledged black ops security force operating within Starfleet. These episodes often end up using Section 31 as a foil to show the dangers of a lawless group within a lawful society, even (especially) when that group posits itself as essential for everyone else’s freedom to continue. The current “Strange New Worlds” has played with a few political themes. I found the first two seasons of this show among the best that the Trek franchise has produced in decades, but this season and the last have really been struggling for ideas. Yet one interesting thread is the idea that the diplomatic and enlightened leadership style of Captain Christopher Pike will not work in all situations. “A Quality of Mercy” (2022), which I wrote about here, puts Pike in the middle of a battle with a Romulan vessel in an alternate timeline, and finds that Pike’s conciliatory style would actually make a lengthy and deadly war more likely, while a quick and more violent approach might have prevented the war. This season’s opener, “Valles Marineris,” shows a pre-lightspeed civilization locked in a war to the death with a neighboring planet. The idea of an alliance or a federation hasn’t even occurred to them — their ship’s commander is curious but doesn’t see it as an option. For a franchise as political as “Star Trek,” one thing we almost never see is the government. We get occasional glimpses of Starfleet’s council — mostly uniformed people at a rectangular table — but almost no sense of how the Federation is governed. Are there elections? Who is in the legislature? How much power does the president have? What kind of factional divisions do they wrestle with and how? The shows and films are pretty silent on this. We’ve seen a few military tribunals within Starfleet, but little about how civilians deal with crime and injustice. With recent years seeing some of the franchise’s more interesting plot lines and casts, it seems clear that Star Trek is still full of energy and ideas. Given the erosion of American democracy and the reshuffling of the international order, there’s no shortage of material for future shows to comment on. I’m not sure we should toast to 60 more years, but cheers to a show that continues to teach us about ourselves. Share
Heart Health: Silent symptoms of the biggest health threats
Some of the most dangerous heart conditions grow silently, without pain, without symptoms, and without warning.
Scientists discover a powerful new antivenom hidden in rattlesnake blood
Researchers discovered that combinations of toxin-blocking proteins naturally found in rattlesnake blood can powerfully neutralize venom from several dangerous snake species. In lab tests, the mixtures were about 10 times more potent than a current commercial antivenom, pointing toward a new generation of nature-inspired snakebite treatments.
Top Mathematician Announces New Institute for A.I. Safety
Jacob Tsimerman, a recent recipient of the Fields Medal, believes that higher mathematics can help curb the dangers of runaway artificial intelligence.
France, SKorea warn at film summit of AI risks to creativity
French President Emmanuel Macron warned on Monday of the dangers of AI in creative sectors, at a summit on the future of cinema that brought together some of the world's top entertainment figures, inc...
Health advisory issued for Ririe Reservoir after potentially dangerous toxins found
IDAHO FALLS — Idaho health officials are warning people to stay out of the water at Ririe Reservoir after testing found high levels of toxin-producing cyanobacteria. The Idaho Department of Health and Welfare issued a health advisory for the reservoir, located east of Idaho Falls off U.S. Highway 26 in Bonneville County. Recent water samples […]
HOMETOWN HEALTH: A-I might be giving you dangerous advice about sleep apnea
AI chatbots gave dangerous medical advice to sleep apnea patients.
Researchers put bright patterned sleeves on 94 hunting cats, and the birds they brought home fell by nearly two-thirds — the colors made stalking cats easier for birds to spot, while their success against mammals barely changed
A simple wardrobe change revealed a blind spot in predators: birds evolved to spot danger, but mammals didn't.
8 Daily Habits to Support Your Heart, Kidney and Metabolic Health
(Feature Impact) When it comes to protecting your heart, supporting your kidney function and improving your metabolic health, you’ll find the advice for each one looks similar. That’s because your body’s systems are deeply interconnected: what affects one will have ripple effects across the others.Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health, or CKM health, is a perfect example. When any one of these systems is compromised, it can lead to problems with the others. Therefore, it’s not uncommon for health problems like heart disease, stroke, diabetes and kidney disease to develop or worsen simultaneously – a condition collectively known as CKM syndrome.The reverse is also true, so habits that are healthy for your heart will have a positive effect on your kidneys and metabolic system and vice versa. Consider these simple strategies that align with the American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8, a list of healthy steps that can improve overall health. Learn more about how these habits and health measures affect your CKM health at Heart.org.Choose Healthy Foods – Food is your body’s fuel, so fill your tank wisely. Certain types of foods can help your blood pressure, cholesterol, blood glucose and triglycerides stay within healthy ranges, while poor nutrition can push those numbers into more dangerous territory. Focus on vegetables, fruits, whole grains, plant-based proteins (e.g. beans, legumes and nuts) and lean animal proteins (e.g. seafood, skinless poultry and low-fat dairy). Drink plenty of water throughout the day and limit added sugar and salty or fatty foods.Stay Physically Active – Exercise doesn’t have to feel like a chore – in fact, some of your favorite hobbies may already count. The American Heart Association recommends aiming for 150 minutes per week of moderate physical activity like dancing, gardening or walking, moving quickly enough to elevate your heart rate and break a light sweat. Alternatively, choose 75 weekly minutes of vigorous exercise that gets you breathing hard and fast; think running, swimming, playing tennis or riding your bike on hilly terrain.Avoid Nicotine – Tobacco and other nicotine products can raise your blood pressure, damage blood vessels and increase your risk of heart attack and stroke, which are all bad news for your CKM health. If you’re currently trying to quit, you aren’t alone, so don’t be afraid to seek out support groups and resources to help.#placement_976606_0_i{width:100%;max-width:550px;margin:0 auto;}var rnd = window.rnd || Math.floor(Math.random()*10e6);var pid976606 = window.pid976606 || rnd;var plc976606 = window.plc976606 || 0;var abkw = window.abkw || '';var absrc = 'https://ads.empowerlocal.co/adserve/;ID=181918;size=0x0;setID=976606;type=js;sw='+screen.width+';sh='+screen.height+';spr='+window.devicePixelRatio+';kw='+abkw+';pid='+pid976606+';place='+(plc976606++)+';rnd='+rnd+';click=CLICK_MACRO_PLACEHOLDER';var _absrc = absrc.split("type=js"); absrc = _absrc[0] + 'type=js;referrer=' + encodeURIComponent(document.location.href) + _absrc[1];document.write('');Prioritize Healthy Sleep – Sleep gives your body a chance to rest and recover from the day, but it’s often one of the first things people sacrifice when life gets busy. Poor sleep can increase your risk for heart disease, weight gain and other issues. Aim for a solid 7-9 hours a night. Keep your bedroom cool, dark and comfortable, and do your best to limit distractions like late-night smartphone scrolling.Watch Your Blood Pressure – When your blood pressure is high, it forces your heart to work harder to pump blood through the body, which can weaken it over time. It can also damage the delicate arteries in and around the kidneys, putting CKM health further at risk. Information is power, so check your blood pressure frequently to know whether further action is needed to keep it under control.Manage Your Blood Sugar – High blood sugar can damage the kidneys, eyes, blood vessels and more, thereby increasing your chance of developing harmful CKM conditions. Controlling blood sugar is particularly important for people with diabetes. If you don’t have diabetes and still experience frequent blood sugar spikes and crashes, talk to your doctor.Control Your Cholesterol – Cholesterol comes in both “bad” (LDL) and “good” (HDL) forms, requiring a balancing act to keep your levels within a healthy range. If LDL is high and HDL is low, your risk of clogged blood vessels, heart attack and stroke are higher. Healthy levels keep blood flowing to your heart and kidneys, supporting your metabolic health in the process. See your doctor for regular bloodwork so you can monitor cholesterol changes.Maintain a Healthy Weight – Since excess body weight puts pressure on the heart, kidneys and other organs, a healthy body weight helps lower your risk of CKM syndrome. Whether you’re hoping to maintain or reduce your weight, regular exercise, healthy eating and quality sleep are all great ways to achieve your goals.
8 Daily Habits to Support Your Heart, Kidney and Metabolic Health
(Feature Impact) When it comes to protecting your heart, supporting your kidney function and improving your metabolic health, you’ll find the advice for each one looks similar. That’s because your body’s systems are deeply interconnected: what affects one will have ripple effects across the others.#placement_1126610_0_i{width:100%;max-width:550px;margin:0 auto;}var rnd = window.rnd || Math.floor(Math.random()*10e6);var pid1126610 = window.pid1126610 || rnd;var plc1126610 = window.plc1126610 || 0;var abkw = window.abkw || '';var absrc = 'https://ads.empowerlocal.co/adserve/;ID=181918;size=0x0;setID=1126610;type=js;sw='+screen.width+';sh='+screen.height+';spr='+window.devicePixelRatio+';kw='+abkw+';pid='+pid1126610+';place='+(plc1126610++)+';rnd='+rnd+';click=CLICK_MACRO_PLACEHOLDER';var _absrc = absrc.split("type=js"); absrc = _absrc[0] + 'type=js;referrer=' + encodeURIComponent(document.location.href) + _absrc[1];document.write('');Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health, or CKM health, is a perfect example. When any one of these systems is compromised, it can lead to problems with the others. Therefore, it’s not uncommon for health problems like heart disease, stroke, diabetes and kidney disease to develop or worsen simultaneously – a condition collectively known as CKM syndrome.The reverse is also true, so habits that are healthy for your heart will have a positive effect on your kidneys and metabolic system and vice versa. Consider these simple strategies that align with the American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8, a list of healthy steps that can improve overall health. Learn more about how these habits and health measures affect your CKM health at Heart.org.Choose Healthy Foods – Food is your body’s fuel, so fill your tank wisely. Certain types of foods can help your blood pressure, cholesterol, blood glucose and triglycerides stay within healthy ranges, while poor nutrition can push those numbers into more dangerous territory. Focus on vegetables, fruits, whole grains, plant-based proteins (e.g. beans, legumes and nuts) and lean animal proteins (e.g. seafood, skinless poultry and low-fat dairy). Drink plenty of water throughout the day and limit added sugar and salty or fatty foods.Stay Physically Active – Exercise doesn’t have to feel like a chore – in fact, some of your favorite hobbies may already count. The American Heart Association recommends aiming for 150 minutes per week of moderate physical activity like dancing, gardening or walking, moving quickly enough to elevate your heart rate and break a light sweat. Alternatively, choose 75 weekly minutes of vigorous exercise that gets you breathing hard and fast; think running, swimming, playing tennis or riding your bike on hilly terrain.Avoid Nicotine – Tobacco and other nicotine products can raise your blood pressure, damage blood vessels and increase your risk of heart attack and stroke, which are all bad news for your CKM health. If you’re currently trying to quit, you aren’t alone, so don’t be afraid to seek out support groups and resources to help.Prioritize Healthy Sleep – Sleep gives your body a chance to rest and recover from the day, but it’s often one of the first things people sacrifice when life gets busy. Poor sleep can increase your risk for heart disease, weight gain and other issues. Aim for a solid 7-9 hours a night. Keep your bedroom cool, dark and comfortable, and do your best to limit distractions like late-night smartphone scrolling.Watch Your Blood Pressure – When your blood pressure is high, it forces your heart to work harder to pump blood through the body, which can weaken it over time. It can also damage the delicate arteries in and around the kidneys, putting CKM health further at risk. Information is power, so check your blood pressure frequently to know whether further action is needed to keep it under control.Manage Your Blood Sugar – High blood sugar can damage the kidneys, eyes, blood vessels and more, thereby increasing your chance of developing harmful CKM conditions. Controlling blood sugar is particularly important for people with diabetes. If you don’t have diabetes and still experience frequent blood sugar spikes and crashes, talk to your doctor.Control Your Cholesterol – Cholesterol comes in both “bad” (LDL) and “good” (HDL) forms, requiring a balancing act to keep your levels within a healthy range. If LDL is high and HDL is low, your risk of clogged blood vessels, heart attack and stroke are higher. Healthy levels keep blood flowing to your heart and kidneys, supporting your metabolic health in the process. See your doctor for regular bloodwork so you can monitor cholesterol changes.Maintain a Healthy Weight – Since excess body weight puts pressure on the heart, kidneys and other organs, a healthy body weight helps lower your risk of CKM syndrome. Whether you’re hoping to maintain or reduce your weight, regular exercise, healthy eating and quality sleep are all great ways to achieve your goals.
8 Daily Habits to Support Your Heart, Kidney and Metabolic Health
(Feature Impact) When it comes to protecting your heart, supporting your kidney function and improving your metabolic health, you’ll find the advice for each one looks similar. That’s because your body’s systems are deeply interconnected: what affects one will have ripple effects across the others.#placement_1126603_0_i{width:100%;max-width:550px;margin:0 auto;}var rnd = window.rnd || Math.floor(Math.random()*10e6);var pid1126603 = window.pid1126603 || rnd;var plc1126603 = window.plc1126603 || 0;var abkw = window.abkw || '';var absrc = 'https://ads.empowerlocal.co/adserve/;ID=181918;size=0x0;setID=1126603;type=js;sw='+screen.width+';sh='+screen.height+';spr='+window.devicePixelRatio+';kw='+abkw+';pid='+pid1126603+';place='+(plc1126603++)+';rnd='+rnd+';click=CLICK_MACRO_PLACEHOLDER';var _absrc = absrc.split("type=js"); absrc = _absrc[0] + 'type=js;referrer=' + encodeURIComponent(document.location.href) + _absrc[1];document.write('');Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic health, or CKM health, is a perfect example. When any one of these systems is compromised, it can lead to problems with the others. Therefore, it’s not uncommon for health problems like heart disease, stroke, diabetes and kidney disease to develop or worsen simultaneously – a condition collectively known as CKM syndrome.The reverse is also true, so habits that are healthy for your heart will have a positive effect on your kidneys and metabolic system and vice versa. Consider these simple strategies that align with the American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8, a list of healthy steps that can improve overall health. Learn more about how these habits and health measures affect your CKM health at Heart.org.Choose Healthy Foods – Food is your body’s fuel, so fill your tank wisely. Certain types of foods can help your blood pressure, cholesterol, blood glucose and triglycerides stay within healthy ranges, while poor nutrition can push those numbers into more dangerous territory. Focus on vegetables, fruits, whole grains, plant-based proteins (e.g. beans, legumes and nuts) and lean animal proteins (e.g. seafood, skinless poultry and low-fat dairy). Drink plenty of water throughout the day and limit added sugar and salty or fatty foods.Stay Physically Active – Exercise doesn’t have to feel like a chore – in fact, some of your favorite hobbies may already count. The American Heart Association recommends aiming for 150 minutes per week of moderate physical activity like dancing, gardening or walking, moving quickly enough to elevate your heart rate and break a light sweat. Alternatively, choose 75 weekly minutes of vigorous exercise that gets you breathing hard and fast; think running, swimming, playing tennis or riding your bike on hilly terrain.Avoid Nicotine – Tobacco and other nicotine products can raise your blood pressure, damage blood vessels and increase your risk of heart attack and stroke, which are all bad news for your CKM health. If you’re currently trying to quit, you aren’t alone, so don’t be afraid to seek out support groups and resources to help. Prioritize Healthy Sleep – Sleep gives your body a chance to rest and recover from the day, but it’s often one of the first things people sacrifice when life gets busy. Poor sleep can increase your risk for heart disease, weight gain and other issues. Aim for a solid 7-9 hours a night. Keep your bedroom cool, dark and comfortable, and do your best to limit distractions like late-night smartphone scrolling.Watch Your Blood Pressure – When your blood pressure is high, it forces your heart to work harder to pump blood through the body, which can weaken it over time. It can also damage the delicate arteries in and around the kidneys, putting CKM health further at risk. Information is power, so check your blood pressure frequently to know whether further action is needed to keep it under control.Manage Your Blood Sugar – High blood sugar can damage the kidneys, eyes, blood vessels and more, thereby increasing your chance of developing harmful CKM conditions. Controlling blood sugar is particularly important for people with diabetes. If you don’t have diabetes and still experience frequent blood sugar spikes and crashes, talk to your doctor.Control Your Cholesterol – Cholesterol comes in both “bad” (LDL) and “good” (HDL) forms, requiring a balancing act to keep your levels within a healthy range. If LDL is high and HDL is low, your risk of clogged blood vessels, heart attack and stroke are higher. Healthy levels keep blood flowing to your heart and kidneys, supporting your metabolic health in the process. See your doctor for regular bloodwork so you can monitor cholesterol changes.Maintain a Healthy Weight – Since excess body weight puts pressure on the heart, kidneys and other organs, a healthy body weight helps lower your risk of CKM syndrome. Whether you’re hoping to maintain or reduce your weight, regular exercise, healthy eating and quality sleep are all great ways to achieve your goals.
I was wrong about the Galaxy Z Fold 8, but the iPhone Ultra is still in danger
A recent poll reveals almost everyone is excited about foldables, but under certain conditions.
Patriots RB TreVeyon Henderson in danger of missing Week 1
If Patriots RB TreVeyon Henderson sits, expect a veteran to lead the way in Week 1
Giants' Cam Skattebo is in More Danger Than You Think
New York Giants running back Cam Skattebo does not have a stranglehold on a starting job.
Canton native's first movie, 'Dangerous Affairs,' a smash hit on Tubi
Canton native Elijah Perrin talks about how his hit film 'Dangerous Affairs' became No. 1 on the streaming platform Tubi.
Canton native's first movie, 'Dangerous Affairs,' a smash hit on Tubi
Canton native Elijah Perrin talks about how his hit film 'Dangerous Affairs' became No. 1 on the streaming platform Tubi.
Tagutu’s double pushes Knights to front
Doncaster.........40 Nottingham.... 24 DONCASTER Knights held firm for an impressive win at Castle Park with strong defence the order of the day. Nottingham enjoyed all the early possession and Knights put in some huge hits to keep them at bay. Telusa Veainu combined with Penaia Tagutu to launch a dangerous counter-attack and when the ball […] The post Tagutu’s double pushes Knights to front appeared first on The Rugby Paper.
Recap: Boston College falters in Cincinnati, loses 34-15
On Saturday afternoon, Boston College opened the 2026 season against Cincinnati. After a 2-10 year, BC tore the roster down to the studs and reset, with the biggest new face being starting quarterback Mason McKenzie, a dangerous dual threat at Saginaw Valley State last season. BC leaned on the run early. Evan Dickens broke out […]
Why the new Trump order to shoot wolves is both illegal and a dreadful precedent for endangered species
On September 4, Donald Trump issued an executive order targeting the Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections of gray wolves and Mexican gray wolves. In the Oval Office he stated to an Arizona ranc…
Patriots Star in Danger of Missing Rematch vs Seahawks
One star player on the New England Patriots is in danger of missing the rematch against the Seattle Seahawks.
More than 1,200 food packaging chemicals can pose serious health risks
And makers won't release data that could help assess the dangers, a new study shows.
Brighton & Hove Albion vs Leeds United: Match preview
Leeds United head to the South Coast on Saturday afternoon looking to maintain their unbeaten start to the 2026/27 Premier League season, but Daniel Farke’s side face one of their toughest tests yet against a Brighton & Hove Albion side who have already shown just how dangerous they can be in front of goal.
Trump moves to allow ranchers and hunters to kill gray wolves
The president ordered his administration to lift Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves, again wading into a fraught debate between ranchers and conservationists.
Already Threatened, Rare Wildlife Dealt Blow by Trump Administration Rule Change
Rule changes to the Endangered Species Act by the White House could make survival more difficult for rare wildlife. The Dept. of the Interior and Dept. of Commerce changed the definition of "harm" in the law, allowing industry to encroach on habitats of endangered species
Already Threatened, Rare Wildlife Dealt Blow by Trump Administration Rule Change
Rule changes to the Endangered Species Act by the White House could make survival more difficult for rare wildlife. The Dept. of the Interior and Dept. of Commerce changed the definition of "harm" in the law, allowing industry to encroach on habitats of endangered species
Lindsay Clancy case exposes dangers of fragmented U.S. health system, experts say
In the months before killing her children, Lindsay Clancy repeatedly sought help for her deteriorating mental health.
Hydrate early, limit alcohol: ASU health director shares game day safety tips
While kickoff signals the long-awaited start of fall for many Alabamians, dangerously high temperatures still pose a serious threat to football fans and athletes alike.
Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says in report that maps path back below danger zone
In a strategic retreat in the fight against climate change, the United Nations has acknowledged that Earth has lost its chance to prevent some of the worst of global warming's harms. So now the world must figure out how to get temperatures below the danger zone and back to safety, officials say.
Schools around Kansas City had to cancel or delay outdoor sports due to dangerous heat all week
High temperatures are pushing Kansas City area schools to delay football games and cancel sports practices in order to keep kids safe on the field. But "it’s an easy decision" to make, one local athletic director said.
Fiber optic cables reveal ‘icequakes’ in endangered glaciers
The technology could help create an early-warning system for changes in ice stability.
For the first time, a key UN report says the 1.5 C global warming threshold is lost
In a strategic retreat in the fight against climate change, the United Nations has acknowledged that Earth has lost its chance to prevent some of the worst of global warming's harms. Officials say the world must now figure out how to get temperatures below the danger zone and back to safety.
Opinion: Balancing That Political Tightrope
Gov. Moore has shown that he can speak from facts and steer clear of the dangerous hyperbole that poisons much of our public discourse today.
The Adriatic Sea's Hidden Shark And Ray Hotspot Is Changing What Scientists Know
The Adriatic Sea is one of the Mediterranean's most important regions for sharks and rays, yet many of its species are critically endangered. New research based on decades of monitoring and close partnerships with local fishers is revealing previously unknown habitats, rediscovering rare species, and reshaping what scientists thought they knew about these animals.
Sunken WWII hospital ship colonized by devil firefish and rare monk seals
A shipwreck off the coast of Albania has attracted both invasive species and provided a home for endangered ones, leading researchers to weigh the risks and benefits of these wrecks for local ecosystems.
Get to Know Your Phone’s Built-In Emergency Kit
In times of natural disasters and other dangers, special features tucked away on your iPhone or Android device could help make a difference.
I helped build Obama's 2008 campaign. Democrats aren't ready for 2026.
The most dangerous political misinformation of the 2026 midterm election may not go viral. You may never see it at all.
Rapid response to heat waves: Using electronic health records to protect patients in near-real time
As summer heat waves grow longer and more dangerous, public health officials often must wait months to learn who and how many people were harmed. A new study published in Nature Health suggests that delays ...
In Texas, ordinary Muslim religious practices are increasingly being treated as political threats
After 9/11, suspicion of Islam hardened into an assumption in Texas that Muslim identity itself signals danger, writes a scholar of constitutional law.
Takeaways From Stanford’s Season Opener, Before No. 7 UM Matchup
Micah Ford’s breakout performance and Davis Warren’s explosive debut highlight a gritty Cardinal victory, signaling a dangerous offensive test for the Miami Hurricanes' retooled defensive front seven.
In 1990, the northern spotted owl became a symbol of America’s logging wars; 36 years later, scientists say it is already functionally extinct across large swaths of its range
In 1990, a small bird became an unlikely symbol of one of America’s fiercest environmental battles. The northern spotted owl was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, putting the future of vast stretches of old-growth forest in the Pacific Northwest at the centre of a bitter fight between environmentalists and the logging industry.
Shohei Ohtani Is Suddenly in Serious Danger of Losing MVP
Dodgers star Shohei Ohtani's MVP defense is looking more and more unlikely as Cubs outfielder Pete Crow-Armstrong continues to amaze.
3 Steelers in danger of being cut before roster deadline
Here's a look at three Pittsburgh Steelers who may surprisingly be cut ahead of the 53-man roster deadline.
Nearly 1 in 5 Medicaid-eligible Adults in Expansion States Are At Risk of Losing Health Coverage Due to Insufficient or Inconsistent Work Hours
A new study found that nearly 20 percent of eligible adults in Medicaid expansion states are in danger of not meeting the minimum work hours that will be required nationwide beginning January 1. Women, unmarried people, White individuals, and those with limited education all had a higher risk of losing their health coverage due to noncompliance with these new requirements.
Glacier collapse that caused Nepal floods was linked to climate change, scientists say
Climate change is making the Himalayas more dangerous, creating a slew of increasing hazards in Nepal.
The hollowing out of Tennis.com is a warning for American sports journalism
Tennis.com once paired news and scores with distinctive voices. Its overhaul is the latest sign that serious tennis writing in the US is becoming endangered
The Literacy Crisis Reaches Dog-Bear Science
“New analysis of more than 300 bear encounters suggests our canine companions often increase odds of conflict and rarely serve as early warning systems many recreationists assume,” reads a subhead in Mountain Journal. The thing is, that study reaches no such conclusion. But you have to read beyond the abstract to understand that. Mountain Journal is not alone. Let’s look at a brief list of takeaways published elsewhere just to establish that none of them seem to know how to read science. Wes Siler’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe Here’s CBC: “A new peer-reviewed study, The Canine Conundrum: Is a Dog a Help or Hindrance in Bear Country?, dug into conflicts similar to what the video depicts, by analyzing 326 reported human-bear conflicts from 1901 to 2023 involving dogs.” “The study found 54 per cent of conflicts were started by dogs. In the encounters researchers included in the study, five people and 56 dogs were killed, and 170 people were injured.” “Lana Ciarniello, an independent researcher who co-authored the study, said researchers found when a person goes hiking with at least one other person, the odds of a negative bear encounter decrease by 50 per cent.” “However, when a dog is involved, the chances of a negative bear encounter increase because ‘a dog really adds a chaotic factor into the mix of recreation,’ said Ciarniello.” Again, the study finds no data supporting that conclusion. “Hiking with your pet dog may make you feel safer in bear country—but a hiker’s recent encounter and a new study prove that the numbers don’t add up,” writes Backpacker, which is now part of Outside. The numbers don’t add up to support this take. There’s plenty more examples, but all are equally dumb, so I’ll stop there. How did so many people get this so wrong? Three reasons: 1) the study is published behind a paywall, with only the abstract freely available. 2) the methodology sets out to create work relevant to a hyper-specific audience, not the public. And 3) the dataset studied is almost absurdly limited and doesn’t bear (get it?!) comparison to wider information. Let’s work through all three. The Problem is Money I understand the irony, since I’m writing about this on a subscription-model newsletter, but information wants to be free. The study is published by The Wildlife Society and costs $16 to access. Reprinting it is specifically prohibited by the terms of use, so I can only share snippets and my conclusions with you here. Having worked as a journalist for 24 years, I can report with some authority that journalists are both lazy and cheap. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that much of the material you’re seeing written about this study is drawn from the freely-available abstract (above) only, and not a deep dive into its methodology or data. And that’s a problem, because abstracts are where researchers are able to break from their numbers and editorialize their opinions about conclusions. So what’s getting reported isn’t based on numbers, it’s based on an opinion designed for a specific audience, not the general public. Hell yeah ladies, kick that bear’s ass. The Methodology is Designed to Support a Predetermined Conclusion One of the biggest issues with the science that everyone likes to cite about bear spray’s efficacy is that no one understands that study was designed for a specific audience, looking for a specific answer. And since that audience is not the public, and our safety was not the question being asked, its conclusion is rendered irrelevant to our needs. Yes, I’m talking about Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska, which was created by Tom Smith and Stephen Herrero, two of the same scientists who put together this dog-bear conflict analysis. In the spray study, the purpose was to present relevant agencies with the information they needed to issue their field workers with bear spray. As such, incidents where people were unable to access the spray or similarly failed to get it deployed in time were excluded from the results, and only incidents they deemed successful were included. Could a ranger roll down their vehicle’s window and scare a bear away from a dumpster by spraying it? Turns out the answer was yes, and that was good enough for the purposes of that study. The sample size of actual bear attacks—the thing you and I would want bear spray to provide a solution to, was too small to draw conclusions from, and didn’t indicate success in that role. Is a Dog a Help or Hindrance in Bear Country? has similar limitations. “Insights provided here are intended to help wildlife managers create effective guidelines regarding the presence of domestic dogs in bear habitat,” is explained clearly by the study’s text. To conduct the study, Smith and Herrero went looking for publicly available reports of dog-bear conflicts: “All incidents included in our analysis involved at least one bear, one dog, and one person who was at immediate risk of injury (e.g., not in a protective structure such as a cabin or vehicle), injured, or killed,” explains the report’s methodology. Why is that a problem? “We recognize that data used in this study are biased in that people generally only report adverse interactions with bears, not benign ones. Consequently, we assume that for the most part, people and their dogs pass through bear country without incident.” As was the problem with the bear spray study, people are drawing conclusions here from a study that was never intended to be relevant to the general public. The Smith-Herrero database famously excludes Alaska’s Defense of Life and Property records, which are elsewhere considered the largest and most authoritative source on human-bear conflict. The Dataset is Absurdly Limited A 2009 study conducted by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife estimates that each year there are at least 43,000 documented complaints of human-bear conflict across North America. Is a Dog a Help or Hindrance in Bear Country? Examined those reports for years ranging from 1901 to 2023, and only managed to find 326 such incidents that met the criteria explained above. Let’s do some quick math, poorly. 43,000 incidents x 122 years = 5,246,000 total incidents of documented human-bear conflict. Smith and Herrero were only able to find 326 incidents that met their criteria for dog+human+bear+risk or occurrence of injury. That means there’s a 0.006 percent chance that the study’s conclusion—that dogs make bear encounters more dangerous—even gets a chance of occurring. And remember, that’s only in documented conflicts. There’s no way to know how many people across North America run into a bear in any given year without any conflict, but it’s probably safe to assume that the total number is well in excess of 43,000. And, dig deeper into the study and you can find further restrictions that skew its conclusions even more. “While the people involved in these incidents did not report the level of training their dogs had received, it is our assumption that most were untrained companion dogs as opposed to well-trained bear dogs, such as Karelians and livestock guardian breeds that have proven to be significant aids in bear country,” the study’s methodology explains. And that’s a problem, because an ongoing study here in Montana is finding that the simple presence of a Kangal like our youngest dog Teddy can reduce visits to private property from grizzly bears by 87.8 percent. In addition to being a badass, Teddy is also a companion animal. And in my admittedly limited sample size of the three dogs currently present in our living room, she’s no more effective than her mutt brothers. Plenty of people own a dog capable of deterring bears, even if they didn’t set out to own a bear dog. The real purpose of this study appears to be a recommendation that leashes are mandated and recreationists pursue training in their deterrent of choice. But that doesn’t make for sensational headlines. Are There Any Real Takeaways Here? Let’s throw some numbers around, just to try and get our hands around what the larger picture might look like for bears and dogs here. The American Veterinary Medical Association estimates that 42.6 percent of American households own a dog. The Canadian Animal Health Institute says roughly 35 percent of households in Canuckistan own a dog. In an attempt to create the worst possible result for dogs, let’s run with that 35 percent number. And given that outdoorsy and rural people are more likely to both own a dog, and have bear encounters, let’s just make a giant assumption and apply that number to those 43,000 conflicts documented annually. If 35 percent of 43,000 human-bear encounters involve a dog, then we can assume that at least 15,050 dog-bear conflicts are occurring annually in North America. 15,050 x 122 = 1,836,100. Smith and Herrero were only able to find 326 incidents that met their human, dog, chance or occurrence of injury criteria across 122 years. And only 170 documented human injuries. So, with all the obvious caveats about these numbers in no way describing reality beyond narrow study parameters, what they actually found is that your risk of injury if your dog tangles with a bear is only 0.009 percent. I’ll take those odds next time I’m hiking my dogs in bear country. Top photo: “Superintendent Horace Albright, eating pancakes with bears, at Lake Lodge, Yellowstone National Park.” NPS. A journalist with more than two decades of experience working around the world, Wes Siler is here to cut through the outrage and disinformation to bring you the factual, insightful, actionable reporting you need to understand what’s going on. Upgrading to a paid subscription supports this reporting, and buys personal access to Wes, who will help you save money on gear, plan outdoor adventures, and prepare for real life, and who promises he’s less salty in real life than he sometimes comes across as on the Internet. Wes Siler’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Yankees news: Aaron Boone's strategy brings playoff concerns
Earlier this week, the New York Yankees lost Fernando Cruz for the season , depleting another arm from their bullpen. Because of this, Aaron Boone has had to take special measures with his use of the bullpen. Even though the Yankees’ playoff odds are good, their World Series chances are in danger as they attempt to navigate the bullpen , according […] The post Yankees news: Aaron Boone's strategy brings playoff concerns appeared first on ClutchPoints.
Different State Regulatory Approaches Reflect Open Questions About AI Mental Health Tools
States are taking different regulatory approaches to AI mental health tools in response to concerns about chatbots providing inaccurate or potentially dangerous advice. Laws and pending legislation in some states restrict AI from providing or advertising itself as therapy, while others focus on data protections, disclosures, and patient consent requirements.
Around the world, people are rejecting divisive and dangerous politics. We can – and must
The vast majority of the global public supports international cooperation on human rights, climate and AI. Like-minded countries must stand together to deliver, says former UK prime minister Gordon Brown
Moment of Science: No, baby rattlesnakes are not more dangerous than adults
"Snake, rattle, and roll!" Dan Smith is clearing up the myth that baby rattlesnakes are more dangerous than adults. 🐍
Antisemitic streamer finally makes Dem leader snap with rare rebuke: ‘Malicious’
House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries calls Hasan Piker's claim that Jewish Americans invite violence against themselves dangerous and antisemitic.
3 Ways Scientists Can Help Hold Major Polluters Accountable Under the Trump Administration
The impacts of climate change have been on full display this Danger Season, from record-breaking heatwaves to devastating wildfires, making evident the urgent need for accountability for the harms caused by supercharged extreme events and long-term changes. These harms have been inescapable across the western US, particularly when it comes to water. As fossil-fueled climate […]
Sport and Politics: Strange Bedfellows or Friendly Ones?
US President Donald Trump’s relentless pursuit of media attention at the 2026 World Cup highlights the dangerous
Bird flu is spreading. Your backyard feeder could make it worse
Backyard bird feeders could become unexpected hotspots for H5N1 as Australia’s bird flu outbreak spreads, bringing species together in ways that rarely occur naturally. Experts say stopping feeding is safest, while smaller amounts of food, no hand-feeding, and careful cleaning can reduce the danger.
Minister tells social media firms to take down dangerous driving content in wake of fatal A66 crash in Middlesborough
Defence minister says police ‘need time’ but ‘in the meantime’ the government has told platforms to take down content glorifying dangerous driving
Minister tells social media firms to take down dangerous driving content in wake of fatal A66 crash in Middlesborough
Defence minister says police ‘need time’ but ‘in the meantime’ the government has told platforms to take down content glorifying dangerous driving
A deep dive into climate change
Some policymakers continue to question the science of climate change, despite the growing evidence of significant damage to life on land and in the ocean.Katja Matthes, director of the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel in Germany, believes the ongoing attempts to politicise climate science and discredit researchers are hindering international cooperation and public understanding. The ocean provides clear evidence of the extent to which changes are occurring, she says.“We are seeing severe, unprecedented and accelerating changes in the ocean — warming ocean temperatures, acidification and oxygen depletion — that are destabilising the most important system that makes life on this planet possible,” Matthes explains. Visible signs of these changes include the melting of ice sheets in the Arctic and Greenland. Deeper down, the growing frequency of hypoxia — or oxygen-deprived “dead zones”, where marine life can no longer survive — in the Baltic and record-high Mediterranean surface temperatures are indicators of the “dramatic warming” of the ocean, she adds.The ocean, which covers around 70% of the Earth’s surface, acts as a vital carbon sink, absorbing around 30% of the planet’s carbon dioxide (CO2) and 90% of the excess heat. However, the global ocean surface temperature has risen by an average of half a degree Celsius since 1982, according to the EU Copernicus observatory. More significant rises have been recorded in the Mediterranean, Black, Baltic and other shallower seas.Some ocean temperature increases do occur naturally, such as during El Niño events. But sustained rises can trigger extreme weather on land — including droughts, floods and catastrophic storms — while also harming marine ecosystems. Only 10% of marine species have been studied, Matthes notes, “so the consequences might be even more severe than we know.”Fostering European cooperation amid uncertaintyMatthes, who holds a doctorate in meteorology, is a professor of atmospheric physics as well as director of GEOMAR. She serves as one of Kiel’s ambassadors to Science Comes to Town (SCTT), an EU-funded programme that aims to promote science’s role in society and strengthen cross-border collaboration in research, innovation and sustainability. SCTT is hosted by the coastal cities of Kiel, Brest (in France) and Split (in Croatia).The SCTT project also provides a platform for raising awareness and understanding between scientists and the public about major issues, such as climate change. Having worked on both sides of the Atlantic, Matthes is frustrated by recent attempts to erode decades of international climate collaboration and question the credibility of research. Earlier this year, the US administration delivered a major blow to global cooperation by withdrawing from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and other global climate organisations, claiming they were “contrary to the interests of the United States.”In addition, a US Department of Energy (DOE) report cast doubt on the latest IPCC climate assessment, which was published in 2024. As a contributing author to the IPCC study, Matthes says the DOE sought to discredit scientists like herself. “Climate change is not a matter of opinion, it really exists and we are witnessing dramatic changes,” she notes. “It’s not climate change as a whole that is being targeted, but scientists and their research.”Other US actions have also hit home for Matthes, who spent three years at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. The White House has announced plans to close the facility, a move that was “pretty tough” due to the German scientist’s personal connections with the staff and their reputation for excellence.Changing the narrative on climate changeEurope’s scientific community remains a driving force on climate research and collaboration. As one of the world’s leading marine research institutions, GEOMAR attracts students from more than 50 countries and plays an important role in global observation initiatives that contribute to understanding and protecting the ocean basins. At a European level, GEOMAR works closely with other top marine research facilities, including France’s Ifremer, an SCTT partner in Brest. GEOMAR has also developed innovative and safe strategies for removing unexploded wartime munitions from the seabed, which release toxic substances that pose a danger to humans and the marine environment. Through the Horizon Europe MMinE-SwEEPER project, this knowledge has been transferred to the European level.These initiatives are examples of how local action can have a global impact, Matthes says, and how Europe can strengthen climate research and partnerships. “This is a chance for Europe to step up and work on climate cooperation and agreements,” she notes. “Climate change is an international problem and a real threat, and we need more speed on climate action than we have now.”Matthes believes her fellow scientists need to communicate that climate change is not only a threat, but an opportunity to find solutions. “We need to change our narrative and expand our strategic alliances with those who are willing,” she says, “and luckily there are a lot of willing people and countries.”Science|Business, which connects policymakers, academics and industry through its news reporting, analysis and events, is an SCTT partner.
A deep dive into climate change
Some policymakers continue to question the science of climate change, despite the growing evidence of significant damage to life on land and in the ocean.Katja Matthes, director of the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel in Germany, believes the ongoing attempts to politicise climate science and discredit researchers are hindering international cooperation and public understanding. The ocean provides clear evidence of the extent to which changes are occurring, she says.“We are seeing severe, unprecedented and accelerating changes in the ocean — warming ocean temperatures, acidification and oxygen depletion — that are destabilising the most important system that makes life on this planet possible,” Matthes explains. Visible signs of these changes include the melting of ice sheets in the Arctic and Greenland. Deeper down, the growing frequency of hypoxia — or oxygen-deprived “dead zones”, where marine life can no longer survive — in the Baltic and record-high Mediterranean surface temperatures are indicators of the “dramatic warming” of the ocean, she adds.The ocean, which covers around 70% of the Earth’s surface, acts as a vital carbon sink, absorbing around 30% of the planet’s carbon dioxide (CO2) and 90% of the excess heat. However, the global ocean surface temperature has risen by an average of half a degree Celsius since 1982, according to the EU Copernicus observatory. More significant rises have been recorded in the Mediterranean, Black, Baltic and other shallower seas.Some ocean temperature increases do occur naturally, such as during El Niño events. But sustained rises can trigger extreme weather on land — including droughts, floods and catastrophic storms — while also harming marine ecosystems. Only 10% of marine species have been studied, Matthes notes, “so the consequences might be even more severe than we know.”Fostering European cooperation amid uncertaintyMatthes, who holds a doctorate in meteorology, is a professor of atmospheric physics as well as director of GEOMAR. She serves as one of Kiel’s ambassadors to Science Comes to Town (SCTT), an EU-funded programme that aims to promote science’s role in society and strengthen cross-border collaboration in research, innovation and sustainability. SCTT is hosted by the coastal cities of Kiel, Brest (in France) and Split (in Croatia).The SCTT project also provides a platform for raising awareness and understanding between scientists and the public about major issues, such as climate change. Having worked on both sides of the Atlantic, Matthes is frustrated by recent attempts to erode decades of international climate collaboration and question the credibility of research. Earlier this year, the US administration delivered a major blow to global cooperation by withdrawing from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and other global climate organisations, claiming they were “contrary to the interests of the United States.”In addition, a US Department of Energy (DOE) report cast doubt on the latest IPCC climate assessment, which was published in 2024. As a contributing author to the IPCC study, Matthes says the DOE sought to discredit scientists like herself. “Climate change is not a matter of opinion, it really exists and we are witnessing dramatic changes,” she notes. “It’s not climate change as a whole that is being targeted, but scientists and their research.”Other US actions have also hit home for Matthes, who spent three years at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. The White House has announced plans to close the facility, a move that was “pretty tough” due to the German scientist’s personal connections with the staff and their reputation for excellence.Changing the narrative on climate changeEurope’s scientific community remains a driving force on climate research and collaboration. As one of the world’s leading marine research institutions, GEOMAR attracts students from more than 50 countries and plays an important role in global observation initiatives that contribute to understanding and protecting the ocean basins. At a European level, GEOMAR works closely with other top marine research facilities, including France’s Ifremer, an SCTT partner in Brest. GEOMAR has also developed innovative and safe strategies for removing unexploded wartime munitions from the seabed, which release toxic substances that pose a danger to humans and the marine environment. Through the Horizon Europe MMinE-SwEEPER project, this knowledge has been transferred to the European level.These initiatives are examples of how local action can have a global impact, Matthes says, and how Europe can strengthen climate research and partnerships. “This is a chance for Europe to step up and work on climate cooperation and agreements,” she notes. “Climate change is an international problem and a real threat, and we need more speed on climate action than we have now.”Matthes believes her fellow scientists need to communicate that climate change is not only a threat, but an opportunity to find solutions. “We need to change our narrative and expand our strategic alliances with those who are willing,” she says, “and luckily there are a lot of willing people and countries.”Science|Business, which connects policymakers, academics and industry through its news reporting, analysis and events, is an SCTT partner.
Yankees' Dangerous Gamble Has Blown Up in Their Face
The New York Yankees played with fire, and surprise, surprise: they got burnt.
Letter: Apply science, aloha to solve cat problem
Hawaii must address the impact of free-roaming cats on native wildlife, but it must be done humanely and based on science. Simply restricting feeding is not a viable solution; it risks increasing predation on endangered species and ignores the root causes of the problem. Hungry cats do not disappear — they might hunt more, further threatening native wildlife (“Enact law to curb feral cat colonies,” Star-Advertiser, Our View, Aug. 19). That is not a responsible outcome.
Braves News: Danger zone, another loss, more
Atlanta Braves news and notes from Saturday
The Pixel 11 Pro is setting a dangerous precedent for Android upgrades
RAM downgrades and price increases aren't the only bad news Pixel owners can expect moving forward as AI features grow.
Living in fear, and not being paid: the health workers on the frontline of DRC’s Ebola outbreak
People fighting to contain rapidly growing outbreak in Democratic Republic of the Congo describe the obstacles and dangers they face