SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " discussion " 942 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
The Ultimate Draft Pick: CMU Showcases the Winning Power of Sports Innovation
"Powering the Future of Sport: A Draft Week Showcase," was a sports-themed day of engaging discussions, live robotics demonstrations and industry innovations on AI’s extraordinary potential to transform the future of sports.
Sam Altman’s Orb Company Promoted a Bruno Mars Partnership That Doesn't Exist
“To be clear, we were never approached … nor were we in any discussions regarding a partnership or tour access,” a spokesperson for the artist tells WIRED.
Cougar science sidelined as pressure takes over
Editor’s Note: This is the final part of a three-part series. By the time Washington’s cougar debate reached its peak intensity, the conflict was no longer limited to public meetings or policy discussions. It had infiltrated the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife itself. What had started as pressure from outside — from parents, hunters,
Connection Takes Root at Annual Northwest Arkansas Health Summit
National and state leaders in health care and community outreach recently convened at the Fayetteville Town Center to engage, learn, and collaborate on solutions to improve access to care across Arkansas. The April 2 summit kicked off with a keynote discussion by Neel Shah, chief medical officer of Maven Clinic,…
Shaky political science: using "simulated" elections over real-world elections
[Dear DSOS readers – this article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in early December, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting. We found that many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data, and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first three articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report, the second one analyzing a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report, and a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research]. In this fourth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we shine a spotlight on seven studies that were web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group (the ERRG is an ad hoc committee headed by New America’s Political Reform Program and joined by the American Enterprise Institute, the Unite America Institute and Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law). This research consortium has been led by Lee Drutman, senior fellow with New America’s Political Reform Program. These seven studies are simply not credible from any objective standard about how political “science” is supposed to illuminate our understanding of either ranked choice voting or politics in general. The feature that six of these seven studies have in common is that they all used surveys – artificial, simulated elections -- to attempt to say something cogent or interesting about ranked choice voting (RCV) elections. None of them used real world data from actual RCV elections – either the 1000+ elections in the US or the many thousands of elections from places like Australia, Ireland and elsewhere where RCV has been used for 100 years. While a few of these studies conclude with some mixed positives about RCV, our analysis here is content neutral. The idea that, with a political reform like RCV, you can ask respondents in a mock, artificial election to vote with that method, with only the barest of explanation about how RCV works or its likely impacts (i.e. no spoiler candidates, majority winners, voters liberated to pick their favorite candidates, coalition-building), and then ask them their thoughts/reactions about voting in that system, with fake candidates and no real campaigning, no real exposure to an actual election or actual candidates, rests on some very puzzling assumptions. The findings of these seven studies actually are contradicted by the findings from many other studies based on real-world RCV elections. These New America studies also failed to list the real-world RCV studies in their own citations, instead including those studies that reinforced their conclusions. The seven studies featured in this article were chosen because they form a cohesive cohort which precisely illustrates one of the main points of our research paper, namely that using surveys, i.e. artificial elections, or mathematical/theoretical models, instead of real-world data, is in fact “shaky political science.” Below are summaries of our analysis of five of the seven New America studies. You can read our complete analysis of all seven studies at our paper, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting.” Choosing to “Vote As Usual” by Andre Blais, Carolina Plescia, and Semra Sevi. New America. (Blais et al., 2021). This study, web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group, used two surveys in which respondents completed ballots for simulated elections using plurality, approval, RCV and point (Score) voting. In both cases the authors provided the respondents with only minimal explanation of each method. For example, the entire explanation for RCV was “For this vote, rank the candidates from your first to your last choice (you do not need to rank them all). This is called the ranked vote.” That’s it. The study did not provide any context or explanation to survey respondents about why she/he might want to rank multiple candidates. Participants were not even told that ballots would be tabulated using an “instant” runoff, not to mention any description of RCVs ability to eliminate the spoiler effect or liberate voters to rank their favorite candidates without fear of helping the “greater evil” candidate to win. That’s like taking an iPhone back in time to 1970 and asking someone if they like it better than their rotary phone without explaining how it works. Their first survey targeted states that held 2020 Super Tuesday Democratic primaries and used the real candidates’ names in the survey; the second survey used fictitious candidates. In other words, they surveyed respondents who had only ever participated in plurality elections, had no history or background with using RCV or any of the other methods, had no clue about its likely impacts, and did not communicate how the alternative methods would be counted, and then asked them: “How satisfied are you with using each system?” Predictably, the winner was plurality elections, the system used for president, Congress, gubernatorial and state legislative elections – in other words, the method they have been using, year after year, all their voting lives. With so little explanation of RCV and its impacts, this study is simply not credible in discovering anything useful about real-world RCV elections. It merely shows that a basic voter education campaign is needed when adopting a new election system. Additionally, the result contradicts many other post-election surveys following real RCV elections, asking opinions from voters who had just participated in a RCV election, that showed a great deal of satisfaction with RCV (see details on that in Studies 22-25 in our paper, as well as the four studies cited in the review for Study 28). Share Other studies on “satisfaction” and “understanding” make similar mistakes, in terms of basing their surveys on inadequate explanation to respondents and lack of education about context. How could any survey ever hope to measure accurately, in essence simulate a real-world election, without actual campaigning candidates, the media writing about those candidates, organizations endorsing candidates and voters being inundated with crucial information? More than anything, what these “studies” based on surveys show is that if you ask voters about something they don’t know very much about, and fail to adequately educate them, their responses will unsurprisingly reflect their confusion. Equally puzzling is that New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group, headed by political scientist Lee Drutman, found this to be a credible enough study that they not only published it but highlighted it in Drutman’s own discussion of research related to ranked choice voting. This pattern was repeated in study after study featured by New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group. For example in Ranked-Choice Voting and Political Expression: Voter Guides Narrow the Gap between Informed and Uninformed Citizens by Cheryl Boudreau, Jonathan Colner, and Scott MacKenzie, the researchers based their analysis on a survey which found that respondents who were asked to vote in a simulated RCV election, with minimal explanation of RCV or how it works, displayed less evidence of being informed about how to use RCV effectively, with the least informed voters ranking fewer candidates. As pointed out under the study above, in a real election voters are informed by a wide variety of methods, including public education by the election administration, by interested political groups, the media, and the candidates themselves who benefit from voters being aware of how to vote in the new system. In Support for Ranked-Choice Voting across Race and Partisanship by Joseph Anthony, David C. Kimball, Jack Santucci and Jamil Scott, the researchers used respondents from different parties and races voting in simulated plurality and RCV elections, who indicated their satisfaction with each voting method. Instead of using real world election results, the authors fell back on the easy, armchair and less reliable academic research methodology of making up mock elections. As with the other studies, little explanation was given of how RCV works or what its implications might be (electing majority winners or eliminating spoilers, for example). Unsurprisingly, this study found that respondents were not very satisfied with RCV. However, when the authors added an explanation that RCV has a tendency to elect more women and people of color, they found that this greater explanation increased the preference for RCV. The more voters were familiar with it, and the more they understood potential positive impacts – surprise! -- the more they were open to switching away from the status quo. Of note, the results from this study are thoroughly contradicted by a number of other studies whose data was obtained from real RCV elections with real voters. Those studies show a great deal of satisfaction with RCV. More “fake election” research An interesting wrinkle on this “research by fake elections” approach, which only served to illustrate how unreliable such “research” can become, was taken in Ranked-Choice Voting, Runoff, and Democracy: Insights from Maine and Other U.S. States by Joseph Cerrone and Cynthia McClintock_,_ also web-hosted and funded by New America’s ERRG. It gets high marks for creativity, but an eye-roll for thinking this could possibly add anything meaningful to our understanding of real world RCV elections. This study tried to determine whether RCV, plurality or two-round runoff elections provided greater voter satisfaction and acceptance of election results. To determine that, the authors conducted a survey asking if voters were satisfied with a fictional newspaper report of an election, with three different versions given to respondents – plurality, runoff and RCV, with variations of Republican/Democrat winners and variations of “come-from-behind” winners,” i.e. candidates not initially in first place but who win the “runoff.” Again, a minimal explanation of RCV or how it works was given, and the survey showed that respondents had the greatest unfamiliarity with RCV than the other methods. The unsurprising result? Respondents were much more satisfied with “come-from-behind” victories in a traditional two-round runoff election than in RCV, even though RCV is also a runoff system but with a single round of counting. Interestingly, the dissatisfaction with RCV disappeared for those who were more familiar with RCV. In fact, among those respondents who were “very familiar” with RCV, they were equally satisfied with RCV, runoff and plurality. Surprise, surprise. Again, what this study revealed, more than anything, is not only the inadequacy of the explanation for RCV given by the authors of this study, but the failure of the research format itself, thinking that such an artificial mock election could somehow simulate what actually happens in the real world in a real RCV election. Those four studies reviewed above are fitting examples of inadequate and shaky political “science.” Other studies reviewed in our paper from the New America/Electoral Reform Research Group cohort which also used mock elections included: Ranked-Choice Voting is an Acquired Taste by Joseph Anthony and David C. Kimball. New America. (Anthony et al., 2021). Ranked-Choice Voting is No Refuge for Extreme Candidates by Melissa Baker. New America. (Baker, 2021). Also included in this New America cohort is Does Ranked-Choice Voting Reduce Racial Polarization? by Yuki Atsusaka and Theodore Landsman, which actually did use real-world election results data but applied an odd and unconventional methodology to the data which relied on shaky assumptions and non-real-world scenarios that were too divorced from reality. To determine levels of “racially polarized voting,” the researchers imagined “ethnic parties,” by which they mean political parties for each ethnic group, which was especially odd since the election data they were using came from nonpartisan RCV races. But then they made an even odder assumption, namely that since race and ethnic characteristics of studied voters were not available, the authors tried to infer that information based on who voters selected and the racial make-up of voters in each district. This amounted to little more than vague and ambiguous guesswork dressed up with a bunch of mathematical equations used to give it a veneer of scientific appearance. Indeed, it seemed to assume racial polarization in order to prove racial polarization. Based on this questionable methodology, the authors concluded that RCV doesn’t reduce racial polarization. But the premise of this study missed an obvious reality: since RCV incentivizes more candidates to run and can result in more diverse fields of candidates, one would expect more racially-polarized voting in voters’ top rankings, not less, because more voters would have someone on that ballot who represents their racial or ethnic identity and more freedom to vote for their real first choice. By encouraging more diverse candidates and eliminating the spoiler effect, RCV facilitates voting for a favorite candidate of your own race and then selecting a second choice with the best likelihood of winning. The real measure is what voters do with their additional rankings – do they consider other candidates and vote “for the best of the rest”? This study didn’t tell us anything useful about that. But readily available data shows this is common in real RCV elections, and candidates act on this knowledge by engaging with voters outside their racial group. So the authors of this study failed to consider or account for what actually happens in real-world elections, and their conclusions are tainted by this failure. New America has contributed a great deal over the past 2.5 decades to our understanding of many policy areas, including politics and political reform (full disclosure: Steven Hill, one of the authors of this article and of the “Shaky Political Science” research paper and series, is a former senior fellow and former director of New America’s political reform program, 2005-2010). So it was especially disappointing that New America funded and published such a large batch of dubious studies about ranked choice voting. The stated praiseworthy goal of its Electoral Reform Research Group was to inspire new academic research about ranked choice voting that would shed light and help the public better understand the impacts of RCV. Instead, the ERRG research did just the opposite. It produced dubious research that created more confusion and misinformation. In so doing, New America’s political reform program contributed to “shaky political science.” Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS, a reader-supported digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe
Mechanohealth: Where life science meets physical forces for health innovation
Integrating mechanobiological principles into disease pathogenesis, therapeutic development, and tissue engineering is reshaping our understanding of biological systems and accelerating the advancement of mechanotherapy and mechanohealth. This field reveals how mechanical cues regulate cellular behavior, such as force transmission along integrin-nucleus pathways and collective cell migration, and tissue functions. In doing so, mechanobiology connects fundamental research with clinical applications, from limiting cancer metastasis and fibrosis to promoting bone regeneration and maintaining vascular homeostasis. Building on discussion from the Inaugural International Conference on Mechanobiology (ICM) 2025, integrating mechanobiological research with clinical strategies offers new opportunities to address unmet needs, including personalized anti-fibrotic interventions or precision bone regenerative therapies. At the same time, it supports the broader concept of mechanohealth -- a paradigm focused on preserving the physiological mechanical balance within tissues.
Science On Screen Series Brings Films And Experts
LEWISBURG — In Lewisburg, the Campus Theatre will host Science on Screen events pairing films with expert discussions. Organizers say the series is supported by a national grant promoting science education through entertainment. Officials say the next event is April 23 at 7pm featuring “2001: A Space Odyssey” with physicist Alan Lightman. Organizers say the program explores
AI in health care: Experts discuss the future of AI practices and policies
Jim VandeHei, CEO of Axios; Marc Boom, M.D., AHA board chair and president and CEO of Houston Methodist; Anne Klibanski, M.D., president and CEO of Mass General Brigham; Jonathan Perlin, M.D., president and CEO of Joint Commission; and Ladd Wiley, senior vice president of global corporate affairs, public policy and advocacy for Epic, all participated in the panel discussion “AI in Health Care: Navigating Policy, Regulation, and the Road Ahead."
Health care leaders discuss opportunities to shape the future of health care delivery, access
AHA Board Immediate Past Chair Tina Freese Decker, president and CEO, Corewell Health, and Rob Allen, president and CEO, Intermountain Health, participated in a discussion moderated by Jim Skogsbergh, former chair of the AHA Board of Trustees, for a discussion about the opportunities and challenges facing health care leaders in today’s landscape.
Advancing epidemic and pandemic preparedness through research readiness: SEAR Unity Studies Network Sites chart the way forward in 2026
On 25 March 2026, WHO Regional Office for the South‑East Asia Region (SEARO) convened the first meeting of the SEAR Chapter of the Unity Studies Network Meeting in 2026 to take stock of progress and plan next steps for strengthening epidemic and pandemic preparedness across the Region. The meeting focused on reviewing the ongoing adaptation of selected, standard Unity Study methodologies, sharing field implementation experiences from 2025, and identifying key priorities to guide collaborative work in 2026.Held virtually, the meeting brought together representatives from six Unity Studies network sites across five countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand) as well as participants from all three levels of WHO.The meeting took place against the backdrop of ongoing regional efforts in South‑East Asia to strengthen early investigations and studies for epidemic and pandemic preparedness, with a focus on pandemic influenza and other emerging respiratory pathogens with epidemic and pandemic potential. In this context, and as part of preparedness for the rapid generation of evidence, the WHO Health Emergencies Programme in SEAR (WHE/SEAR) encourages Unity Studies sites to adapt prioritized, standardized Unity Study protocols to their national contexts. This approach supports the generation of timely and reliable evidence to inform public health decision‑making during epidemics and pandemics.These efforts are supported through a combination of experience sharing, participation in the global Unity Studies network webinars, capacity‑building of the national public health workforce, and regional collaboration that promotes inter‑country, inter‑agency, and inter‑ministerial action. In parallel, sites are encouraged to explore diversified funding sources to help sustain research preparedness over the long term.Discussions highlighted the importance of WHO’s catalytic financial support through the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Partnership Contributions (PIP‑PC). When combined with national and institutional resources, this support enables countries and sites to maintain continuity of activities at a core level and remain prepared to respond rapidly and effectively to future epidemics and pandemics.Regional and Global Updates: Opening the session, Dr Pushpa Ranjan Wijesinghe, Programme Area Manager, Pandemic and Epidemic Management (PEM) Unit, WHO Health Emergencies Programme, highlighted the progress made in operationalizing the Unity Studies Network across the Region and acknowledged the collaborative efforts of WHO at all three levels, together with country unity studies sites. He emphasized the availability of limited but catalytic funding through the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Partnership Contribution (PIP‑PC) workplan at SEARO to sustain network activities in 2026, while encouraging sites to leverage additional funding sources to expand implementation.Representing SEARO, Dr Ashok Basnet, consultant, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness reported that, at the regional level, the Unity Studies Network currently includes six sites across five countries: Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. He noted that in 2025, catalytic funding supported protocol adaptation, training, and pilot implementation. In addition, a regional Unity Studies symposium held during the Global Public Health Summit in Sri Lanka strengthened and advocated collaboration between the Unity Studies site, national decision‑making forum, relevant technical units of the ministry of health, WHO and other partners.The symposium also highlighted the role of early investigations and studies as a key component of a multi‑source surveillance system needed at country level to generate a broad range of evidence. It underscored the critical role of country Unity Studies sites and similar research entities in generating evidence to support public health decision‑making during epidemics and pandemics.Participants of the WHO GISRS Unity Studies Sites Network- SEAR Chapter Meeting 2026 (Photo credit- PEM/WHE/SEARO). SEARO also updated participants on ongoing efforts to develop a regional Unity Studies webpage and to promote participation in global knowledge‑sharing platforms, including webinars and the WHO Community of Practice. Priorities for 2026 include supporting the implementation of Unity protocols, strengthening collaboration and experience sharing across sites, documenting and publishing findings, integrating Unity Studies activities as a component of multi-source national surveillance systems, and building workforce capacity.Dr Nickle Boddington of the Global Influenza Programme (GIP) at WHO Headquarters, which coordinates the Unity Studies Network globally, provided updates on global Unity Studies activities, noting that the network has expanded to 16 sites worldwide. New and updated protocols, including rapid clinical severity assessment tools and standardized data platforms, are being developed to support implementation. The global Community of Practice has also been launched to facilitate technical exchange, and continued support will be provided to sites for protocol adaptation, ethical approvals, and readiness for early investigation during outbreaks. Updates from Unity Studies sites in SEAR in 2025Unity Studies sites shared progress and experiences in implementing protocols across diverse country contexts. Sites initiated activities in 2025 using catalytic funding from SEARO, complemented by the mobilization of internal national resources. The Institute of Epidemiology, Disease Control and Research (IEDCR), Bangladesh, reported the adoption and piloting of investigation protocols on non‑seasonal influenza and emerging respiratory diseases during recent avian influenza outbreaks, demonstrating a multi‑source funding approach involving government, WHO and One Health partners.The Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (HIMSR), New Delhi, India, highlighted the piloting of household transmission investigation studies, the expansion of the national Unity Studies network, and the contribution of study findings to global evidence through published outputs. The All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India, shared experiences from large‑scale seroprevalence studies conducted during the COVID‑19 pandemic, recent efforts to strengthen national Unity network sites through training activities, and plans to initiate multi‑centre studies on respiratory viruses.Similarly, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand, highlighted its experience in developing integrated surveillance and diagnostic protocols for multiple respiratory pathogens, enhancing readiness for targeted investigations of emerging threats. The University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka, reported ongoing engagement with the Ministry of Health and exploration of additional funding sources to initiate studies. Meanwhile, the National Public Health Laboratory, Nepal, provided updates on continued coordination with national stakeholders to initiate implementation, despite delays related to the country context.Across sites, shared experiences underscored the importance of protocol adaptation, multisectoral collaboration, and sustainable funding to operationalize Unity Studies and generate evidence for public health action.Discussions and Way ForwardThe meeting reinforced key priorities for 2026, including strengthening unity studies protocol implementation, enhancing collaboration, knowledge sharing, integrating research as a component of national multi-source surveillance systems, and ensuring that generated evidence informs public health decision‑making. Participants also emphasized the importance of documentation, visibility, and leveraging multiple funding sources, and agreed on the following action points.Unity Studies Sites and WHO Country Offices:Advance adoption and implementation of at least one Unity protocol, continuing activities initiated in 2025 with catalytic funding, supplemented with other sources of funding where feasible.Document site-specific experiences, outcomes, and lessons learned; participate in regional and global knowledge-sharing platforms including WHO webinars and the Community of Practice.Work closely with ministries of health to establish unified national platforms for translating generated evidence into national public health decision-making. WHO Country Offices may facilitate technical support and complementary, synergistic funding opportunities where feasible. WHO Regional OfficeCoordinate with WHO Country Offices to support implementation of core unity studies activities by network sites through catalytic funding and provide technical guidance and virtual engagement opportunities throughout 2026.Facilitate the participation of all Unity Studies sites in the regional meeting on Unity Studies implementation in October 2026, to be held back‑to‑back with the Annual SEAR Regional PIP‑PC Meeting; develop and host a SEAR Unity Studies website; and mobilize support from academic institutions within the SEAR Unity Studies Network to support the development of regional manuscripts that showcase Unity Studies activities to scientific audiences and promote knowledge‑sharing.Explore complementary funding opportunities and partnerships to sustain and expand network activities across the Region.WHO HeadquartersProvide global technical guidance, updated protocols, and toolkits to support the implementation of Unity Studies in SEAR.Facilitate engagement of SEAR sites in global webinars, the Community of Practice, and opportunities to showcase their work.Support joint publications, inclusion of SEAR experiences in global outputs, and identification of additional funding and collaborative opportunities to strengthen Unity Studies activities.
Opinion: For its mental health ecosystem, UCLA needs a more imperative culture
Editor’s note: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the United States is available by calling or texting 988.
Homelessness update expected to lead discussion at Wausau Public Health and Safety meeting - Wausau Pilot & Review
By Shereen Siewert | Wausau Pilot & Review Homelessness, shelter trends and public safety pressures downtown are expected to draw close attention when
Trump ‘in discussions’ with IRS to cut deal in tax record lawsuit
President Donald Trump is in talks with the Internal Revenue Service to strike a deal over the release of his tax records. The news was revealed in a legal filing, where his legal team said they were in “discussions” with the IRS to “avoid protracted litigation.” Trump is seeking $10 billion in damages, which would […]
Coastal Empire entrepreneurs invited to Savannah business summit spotlighting funding, leadership and growth
The event will bring together business owners, professionals and community leaders for a day of keynote sessions, breakout discussions and networking.
Sphere Entertainment in talks to build venue at Nashville East Bank scrapyard
Sphere Entertainment Company recently entered into conversations with the owners of Nashville’s East Bank scrapyard property about developing a potential venue, according to people familiar with the discussions. Axios reported last month that representatives tied to the Las Vegas Sphere had been in discussions with Nashville executives about bringing a smaller version of the high-tech concert venue to the market. A spokesperson for the scrapyard ownership group declined to comment, and Sphere Entertainment did not respond to a request for comment. More discussions occurred as recently as the past two weeks, the Nashville Business Journal reported, though the status of […]
Trump administration considers unfreezing $20 billion in Iranian assets as peace talks hit home stretch
The Trump administration is considering unfreezing $20 billion in Iranian assets as part of ongoing negotiations with Tehran, according to a source familiar with the discussions.
Connecting to Community Business Leaders through Storytelling
As a part of Montclair State University’s mission, deepening our understanding of shared experiences is an important part of our work. This Spring Session, Bloomfield Campus Library provided the space for an open discussion about leadership for Black and Latina women. Bloomfield Campus Library invited a panel of speakers to reflect on their journeys as […]
Get Real With SOMD Politics: Chuck Borges Discusses Housing Affordability, Economic Development And Tax Reform
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — On a recent episode of “Get Real with Southern Maryland Politics,” host Chris Hill sat down with state Senate District 29 candidate Chuck Borges for a wide-ranging discussion about his background, career, and priorities for Southern Maryland. Borges, a 23-year U.S. Navy veteran, said he came to Southern Maryland in 2004 for test pilot […]
Chargé Arnold Speech - Implementation Plan of Five-Year Health MOU - U.S. Embassy in Madagascar
Chargée d’Affaires Stephanie Arnold's Speech Discussion on the implementation plan for the five-year health Memorandum of Understanding (…) Colleagues, and honored guests, Good morning, and welcome to the United States Embassy. It is a pleasure to host you today for the second day of this important workshop to discuss the implementation of our bilateral health Memorandum of Understanding on U.S. Government health activities in Madagascar, made possible through the Trump Administration’s America First Global Health Strategy. Today’s focus— discussing a shared vision and developing a preliminary draft for the health MOU Implementation Plan and the terms of reference for the two committees that will steer its implementation—is a decisive step in moving from commitments on paper to concrete action over the next five years. On December 22, 2025, the Governments of Madagascar and the United States signed a five-year bilateral health MOU, with a financial intention of approximately 554 billion Ariary from the United States and This jointly decided MOU intends to strengthen Madagascar’s health system, support lifesaving services, and improve disease prevention and response that matter to both our countries’ health security. For the United States, this means detecting and containing infectious disease outbreaks including malaria, polio, and emerging health threats before they can reach American shores through international travel and trade, protecting American families while reducing the need for costly domestic emergency responses Yesterday, technical experts from the Ministry of Public Health and the U.S. Government worked in thematic groups to draft a preliminary Implementation Plan. Today, your task is to review the shared vision and preliminary draft MOU implementation plan, and the proposed terms of reference for the Joint Steering Committee and the Operational Committee that will guide its implementation. These committees are not just administrative structures. They are the mechanisms that will ensure clear roles and responsibilities, regular dialogue between our two governments, consistent monitoring of progress, and real accountability for the results that will directly benefit the lives of Malagasy citizens. They will also track performance against the benchmarks we have jointly established, which will guide the continuation of U.S. support over the five-year period . Continued U.S. support will be contingent on meeting these performance benchmarks. This ensures accountability to both American and Malagasy taxpayers and guarantees that our partnership delivers measurable results. America First Foreign Assistance means that U.S. support must be strategic, results-driven, and accountable to our taxpayers. It also means we aim to support greater self-reliance and reduced long-term dependence on foreign assistance, with systems that are increasingly financed and led by Madagascar itself. This approach benefits both our nations: Madagascar gains sustainable health capacity, while the United States advances our health security interests and creates opportunities for American health innovations and companies to support Madagascar’s development. In that spirit, I want to recognize the presence of the Ministry’s leadership and the technical directors and program heads responsible for surveillance, basic health services, family health, immunization, countering malaria, laboratories, medicines, and health information systems. Your leadership and technical expertise are essential if this bilateral health MOU is to translate into real and lasting improvements for people in need across the country. Let me emphasize how important collaboration is to the United States in this effort. We can bring American resources, technical expertise, and tools. But this bilateral health MOU can only succeed if it reflects Madagascar’s priorities and if Malagasy institutions lead and maintain its implementation. We see this not as a U.S. project, but as a joint framework under Malagasy leadership, with U.S. support. That is why we are genuinely pleased to host this event here at the Embassy. Opening our doors to you today symbolizes our commitment to work side by side and to remain transparent about how we use U.S. resources in support of Madagascar’s health system. In closing, thank you for your time and your partnership. We are very happy to welcome you here and proud to accompany Madagascar in this next step of implementation planning for our bilateral health MOU. I wish you a productive and focused session. The work you do today will shape how our two governments cooperate on health in the years ahead; it will influence the quality and reliability of health services that Malagasy communities receive; and, most importantly, it will help protect both our nations from infectious disease threats while building Madagascar’s capacity for long-term health system sustainability. Thank you.
Exploring the Future of Business School Education: Insights from AACSB President Lily Bi
Bi's discussion sparked a thought‑provoking exploration of the continued value of business schools in a disruptive world.
Mariners Game #19 Preview and Discussion: SEA at SDP
Emerson Hancock takes the ball for the Mariners on Jackie Robinson Day
Meghan Markle Says She Was Once the 'Most Trolled Person in the Entire World'
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry visited a youth mental health group during the third day of their trip to Australia. During a discussion with young people, Meghan said she was once 'the most trolled person in the entire world' and she has been 'bullied and attacked' every day for 10 years on social media.
'Show me the money'
What happens when a former senator, a prior governor, a previous representative, and a political advocate talk about corporate money in politics? The exact scenario played out at the MSU-hosted discussion titled “Money, Transparent Elections and the Montana Experience,” at the end of last week. Audience members experienced a bipartisan glimpse into corporate influence, how it is built, spent on campaigns and challenged by voters. A candid conversation emerged between guest speakers former Montana U.S. Senator Jon Tester, former Attorney General and Governor Marc Racicot, previous state senator and representative Jeff Mangan, and political advocate Michel Beckel. The conversation between the four guests circled back to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a landmark 2010 Supreme Court ruling allowing corporations, unions, and associations to spend unlimited amounts of money influencing elections. The decision concluded independent political spending is a form of free speech protected by the First Amendment, directly leading to the rise of massive political action committees and ‘dark money’ in U.S. elections spending. Tester was the first to address the ‘black elephant’ in the room. Responses to moderator questions are edited for clarity and brevity. “We are seeing unbelievable sums of money being put out trying to influence people on how to vote,” Tester said. “Oftentimes the truth goes out the window before the campaigning even starts.”
Green Bay Packers Draft: Defensive Line Discussion
The Green Bay Packers have brought in three draftable linemen in for pre-draft visits, per reports
NFIB Hosts Speaker Matt Huffman at Lima Small Business Roundtable
Lima small business owners had a lunchtime discussion with Speaker Huffman.
Xbox Is Having 'Very Big Discussions' About Exclusivity, Says Reporter
"There are very very very big discussions..."
Gossip: Howe still involved in transfer plans despite uncertain future
Newcastle's hierarchy are continuing to include boss Eddie Howe in discussions on transfer plans for the summer despite uncertainty over his future at St James' Park for the first time. The I) Arsenal and Chelsea are leading the chase to sign Newcastle's Lewis Hall, 21, but the Magpies will not let the left-back leave easily. (Caught Offside)
PS4 Still Leads Xbox Series X in GTA Online Users, PC Ranked Last
A new data leak shows that Grand Theft Auto 5 still has a strong player base on the PlayStation 4, even as PS6 discussions begin
Patient-Provider Discussions on Lung Cancer Screening: Insights From the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS)
Background Lung cancer risk is significantly elevated in individuals with chronic lung diseases (CLDs), including asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis. Despite this, lung cancer screenin...
Paul W. Smith: Are friends avoiding political talk about Trump and Iran?
A childhood friend's note sparks a question: Are people avoiding political discussions about Trump and Iran with friends?
The War With Iran Offered a Snapshot of Trump World. It’s Not a Pretty Picture.
In a roundtable discussion, POLITICO reporters detail how the war in Iran pulled back the curtain on the Trump administration.
For aging Supreme Court justices, the politics of retirement looms large
Discussion among experts about a possible Supreme Court vacancy has increased as two men draw closer to the average age of retirement for Supreme Court justices since 2000 and with the November congressional elections looming.
State of Small Business in Austin- The Economic Outlook in 2026
Explore how 2026 economic trends are shaping growth opportunities for Austin's small businesses. Kick off Austin Small Business Week (May 4-8) with Austin Economic Development at the State of Small Business in Austin breakfast and panel discussion.
Elvis and tattoos? Go inside the Memphis Tattoo Festival at Graceland
Discussions of Elvis and tattoos are inevitable this weekend, as the Memphis Tattoo Festival is held at the Graceland Exhibition Center.
Health chatbots could pave the way for 'AI privilege' in court
Tech companies like OpenAI have many reasons to keep your discussions with health-focused AI locked up.
World Leaders Push to Save Iran Talks Amid Israel’s Attacks in Lebanon
President Trump’s cease-fire with Iran appears at risk as Vice President JD Vance heads to Pakistan for discussions with Iranian officials.
Scientists to discuss Suncoast environmental threats at free Sarasota panel
One researches dolphin pods in Sarasota Bay. Another studies the impacts of pollution in area waterways. A third leads a consortium that strives to bring awareness to the work of local scientists. Those experts, along with another local environmental advocate, will lead a panel discussion moderated by Suncoast Searchlight on
Celebrate Amazing Stories and Science Fiction’s 100th Birthday
Doors Open 7:15 p.m. Celebrate Amazing Stories and Science Fiction’s 100th Birthday with us! In April 1926, Hugo Gernsback published Amazing Stories magazine for the first time, and while the name of the genre took a few more years to become a household term, many credit this moment with the birth of Science fiction fandom as we know it today! Join us for a two-panels featuring a discussion on the impact of Amazing Stories and Science Fiction as a genre! Featuring published authors, scholars, and podcasters with deep knowledge of the history and great works of the last 100 years. The second panel will be a how-to guide for writing your own Science fiction stories or novels, including teachers, authors, and scholars of the genre. Verbatim Books on Facebook / Instagram
Oklahoma Governor’s Vote Steered $2 Billion Advisory Role to Former Business Partner’s Firm
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt voted to award a multibillion-dollar investment advisory contract to a firm run by his former chief of staff and one-time business partner, without any board discussion of their prior relationship. The contract positions the firm to earn fees from successful investments it brings before the state board.
Davids Hosts Tariff Discussion with Wyandotte County Small Business Owners
KANSAS CITY, KS — Today, Representative Sharice Davids hosted a discussion with Wyandotte County small business owners and economic development leaders to talk about the successes and challenges facing local businesses, including the impact of reckless tariffs.
House Dem leaders open door to 25th Amendment after rank-and-file push for Trump's removal
House Democrats reignited 25th Amendment discussion as leadership scheduled a briefing amid calls from members to remove President Trump from office.
Forage 2026 | A balancing act: The science of silage
The discussion about what to feed beef cattle throughout the year is among the most important conversations for the operation. For many, silage is a consideration. Galen Erickson, Ph.D., Nebraska Cattle Industry Professor of Animal Science and Beef Feedlot Extension Specialist, University of Nebraska-Lincoln,...
Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy on American Politics and the GOP
Former U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy participates in a discussion on the state of American politics and the Republican party at a forum hosted by The John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum at Harvard University.
Inside Rob Wright's decision to enter the transfer portal and what's next
The money and talent discussions behind the BYU guard's decision to enter the transfer portal again
Polygon Labs in Talks to Raise Up to $100 Million for Payments Business
Polygon Labs, developer of the blockchain that underpins prediction market Polymarket and other crypto platforms, is in early talks with investors to raise as much as $100 million to build a new stablecoin payments business, according to people familiar with the talks. The funding discussions ...
Viewpoint: FP10 should remain open, excellent and secure
Europe is right to worry about research security. Foreign interference is real. So is the misuse of sensitive knowledge. Universities working in sensitive areas such as AI, quantum, semiconductors and advanced materials cannot afford to ignore the geopolitical environment around them.But Europe is in danger of drawing the wrong conclusion, one that would increase, not reduce, its strategic vulnerabilities.If the EU applies an “EU preference” logic to the next Framework Programme for research and innovation (FP10), it will weaken one of its greatest strategic assets: a research system built on openness, excellence and international collaboration. In the name of security, Europe could end up advancing science more slowly, innovating less effectively and making itself less attractive to global talent and partners in advanced science and technology.That would be a serious mistake.The EU preference included in Article 10 of the proposed European Competitiveness Fund may make sense in some industrial or deployment contexts, but is far harder to justify when applied to collaborative research in advanced science and technology, where excellence and global connectivity are crucial. Research is not procurement. It does not thrive when isolated. It advances through access to the best ideas, the best people, the best facilities and the best data, wherever they are found. This is why FP10 should not simply absorb industrial policy logic by default. Doing so would risk importing instruments that are ill-suited to research and that ultimately increase vulnerability rather than resilience.For universities of science and technology, the issue is especially acute. These institutions sit at the frontier of knowledge and technology creation in the very fields Europe sees as critical for its future competitiveness and resilience. They know better than most that security risks are real. But they also know that openness and security are not opposites. In practice, they have to be made to work together. Research security is not about closing doors. It is about building resilience through collective responsibility, trust, proportionate safeguards and better governance. That is a fundamentally different approach from default restriction.The risks of non-collaborationThe real danger in the current debate is that Europe talks too much about the risks of collaboration and not enough about the risks of non-collaboration. Those risks are strategic too. Cut researchers off from international networks and Europe loses access to knowledge, data, infrastructures and talent. Slow down global collaboration in critical technologies and Europe slows down its own progress on cutting-edge science. Make participation rules unpredictable and Europe weakens its attractiveness to researchers and investors alike.In other words, over-restricting collaboration will create strategic vulnerabilities, particularly in advanced science and technologies.This point is often underestimated in policy discussions that frame openness mainly as a value to be defended. Europe’s scientific strength, technological development and long-term competitiveness depend on remaining connected to the best research ecosystems in the world. For a continent that wants to accelerate deep tech, strengthen industrial capacity and reduce strategic dependencies, weakening the excellence base would be self-defeating. That does not mean ignoring risk. Quite the opposite. Universities are already strengthening due diligence, internal governance, awareness-raising, screening procedures and compliance support. Across Europe, institutions are working to manage risks linked to foreign interference, sanctions, export controls and the misuse of research. The right response is not complacency. It is better risk management. But that means targeted, evidence-based and proportionate measures, not blunt top-down restrictions with wide spillover effects. In the daily reality of universities, openness and restriction often coexist. The real challenge is how to apply safeguards without sliding into securitisation that damages academic freedom, open science and international cooperation. Restrict partners, not nationsMore restrictive treatment of collaborators from European Economic Area members Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, or from Switzerland and the UK, is strategically very difficult to justify. These are deeply embedded partners in Europe’s research and innovation ecosystem. Beyond that, Europe should still resist default exclusion and instead rely on case-by-case assessment. The relevant question is not nationality in the abstract. It is the actual risk profile of a collaboration: the institution, the affiliations, the field, the knowledge involved, the intended use and the safeguards available. Screening should focus on institutions and affiliations rather than nationality alone. Related articlesParliament ‘misreads’ link between Horizon Europe and ECF, Commission official saysFrustration grows at governance gap in next Horizon EuropeIf EU preference logic is imported into research without careful calibration, the likely result is a chilling effect. Researchers may step back from legitimate and beneficial collaboration, even where risks are manageable. International partners may see Europe as less predictable. And Europe may end up undermining the very excellence base it needs to compete, scale up and lead in strategic technologies, thereby increasing its dependence on others.FP10 should do the opposite. It should remain open by default, with restrictions used only exceptionally, and then on the basis of clear evidence. It should integrate research security into open science and research integrity frameworks, not set them against each other. And it should recognise that academic freedom, scientific excellence and responsible international collaboration are not obstacles to Europe’s security, they are part of it. Europe needs stronger tools to protect itself. But it also needs the discipline to avoid measures that would weaken it and increase its strategic vulnerabilities in the process. In FP10, that means staying open, excellent and secure.Louise Drogoul is senior advisor for innovation and sustainability at the Cesaer university association.
Packers Discussion: Favorite draft fits for Green Bay
Here are some players I would really like to see in green and gold
Why Do Deliberative Discussions Reduce Affective Polarization? Evidence from a Deliberation Experiment in Honduras - April 7, 2026
Deliberative democracy advocates argue that deliberation can strengthen democracy in part by reducing partisan hostility and affective polarization. Yet - Why Do Deliberative Discussions Reduce Affective Polarization? Evidence from a Deliberation Experiment in Honduras April 7, 2026
IAM Union Members Gather to Bolster Political Action and Solidarity in Wisconsin
Delegates from the IAM Wisconsin State Council recently gathered in Madison for a three-day meeting, bringing together members from across the state. Discussions underscored regulatory and political challenges impacting collective bargaining, while reaffirming the need for solidarity and proactive engagement to strengthen workers’ rights. Gov. Tony Evers opened the conference with remarks and, joined by
Affordability and Preventive Public Health Policy
Affordability pressures increasingly shape health risk in the United States, influencing both the upstream conditions that sustain health and the downstream ability to access health promoting resources. Financial stability is a key driver of health, affecting patterns of health, health care use, and the tradeoffs people must make among competing needs. The economic policy landscape aimed at improving financial security for Americans is expansive, complex, and often difficult to organize, making it challenging to discuss how different policies influence financial resilience and population health. We propose the Earn–Keep–Grow framework as a practical way to organize and guide discussion of these policies in population health research and policy decision-making.
Immunic COO highlights the importance of science-led innovation to mark World Health Day
Immunic Inc (NASDAQ:IMUX, FRA:10VA) chief operating officer Jason Tardio talked with Proactive's Stephen Gunnion about the importance of science-led innovation in tackling neurological diseases, particularly multiple sclerosis, on World Health Day 2026. Tardio highlighted that the biotech industry is fundamentally grounded in scientific research and data, noting that “everything we do is rooted in science.” He explained that Immunic is focused on developing innovative therapies designed to improve patient outcomes and address significant unmet medical needs. The discussion centred on multiple sclerosis (MS), a complex neurological disease that continues to present challenges despite decades of progress. Tardio pointed out that while advancements have been made, “the disease is not solved for,” with many patients still experiencing disability progression and requiring safer, more tolerable treatments. He emphasised the urgent need for innovation, particularly in progressive forms of MS where treatment options remain extremely limited. Immunic’s lead asset, vidofludimus calcium, is being developed as a novel approach aimed at addressing the full spectrum of the disease. Tardio also reinforced the broader mission of the healthcare and biotech sectors, stating that the ultimate goal is to help individuals “live a better quality of life” and “a healthier life longer.” Watch the full interview to learn more about Immunic’s approach to advancing MS treatment through science. For more videos like this, visit Proactive's YouTube channel, like this video, subscribe to the channel, and enable notifications so you never miss an update. #Immunic #MultipleSclerosis #BiotechInnovation #Healthcare #MSResearch #DrugDevelopment #ClinicalTrials #Neurology #WorldHealthDay #ScienceDriven #VidofludimusCalcium #PharmaNews #BiotechNews
Upcoming Tech and Sourcing Webinar on Digital Health
Join partner Ben Klaber and of counsels Ariel Seeley and Eric Pennesi on Thursday, April 9, 2026 from 12:00 to 1:00 pm ET for a discussion on innovations and trends in digital health. Topics will include artificial intelligence and connected devices, as well as data governance and regulatory developments.
Activists and Policy Advocates on the Role of Civility in Politics, Media, and Everyday Life
Activists and policy advocates sit down for a discussion on the impact of civility on politics, the media, and everyday life. NYU Washington, DC, hosts this event.
VHC Health development plan faces pushback at environmental meeting
A proposal for a new behavioral health center on S. Carlin Springs Road is facing pushback on environmental impacts and effects on the surrounding neighborhood. Misgivings about the 146-bed, 131,000-square-foot development proposal from VHC Health and Lifepoint Health made their way into discussions at the March 26 meeting of the county's Forestry & Natural Resources
Bucs to talk with Tampa Sports Authority about Raymond James Stadium renovations
Discussions about needs and costs come as the NFL team nears a 2027 decision on extending its lease, and the Rays are seeking about $1.15 billion in public money for a new ballpark across the street.
From Policy to Practice: Shaping the Future of Health Care
Join us for a panel discussion exploring how policy decisions are shaping the future of health care.
Whole Hog Politics with Bill Sammon and Bill Sammon: Join the discussion
The Hill’s senior vice president of editorial content, Bill Sammon, joins NewsNation’s Chris Stirewalt to discuss the latest political hot topics and national news in “Whole Hog Politics.” The show…
Sherrill hosts roundtable on improving opportunities for minority and women business owners
Gov. Mikie Sherrill on April 2 visited the future site of Rojo’s Roastery & The Gingered Peach to help frame a roundtable discussion on increasing opportunities and leveling the playing field for Minority and/or Women Business Enterprises (MWBEs).
In conversation with Craig Melvin, Rahm Emanuel says Dems lost focus
Rahm Emanuel, a former White House chief of staff and Chicago mayor spoke at Wofford College for a political discussion moderated by Craig Melvin
Blackstone Is Said to Plan $500 Million India IPO for AGS Health
Blackstone Inc. has begun discussions with investment banks about a potential initial public offering of its AGS Health Pvt. unit in Mumbai to raise as much as $500 million, according to people familiar with the matter.
‘Change the terrain’ for deliberative democracy
Vince Bzdek’s Gazette piece on James Fishkin’s experiments in deliberative democracy is an interesting read, though the very factors that produced its results — balanced information, expert moderation, and structured discussion — are what everyday politics lacks, and precisely what make these experiments so difficult to scale (“Can deliberation save democracy?” March 8). The processes […]
Science in the age of AI
The transformative potential of new tools was the emphasis of Virginia Tech's Leaders+ discussion in Alexandria with OpenAI Vice President for Science Kevin Weil. The event was attended by more than 150 researchers, graduate students, and other members of the scientific and industry communities.
Epic Games layoffs: developer with terminal brain cancer loses life insurance
Epic Games’ latest round of layoffs, which cut roughly 1,000 roles, has drawn renewed scrutiny after reports that a longtime programmer with terminal brain cancer lost his employer-sponsored life insurance immediately upon termination. While the company offered severance and six months of continued health coverage, the employee’s family says a pre-existing condition prevents obtaining new coverage, prompting outreach to Epic executives and an update that discussions are now underway.
Navigating the social media minefield
Scientists and researchers seeking to announce promising findings, exchange ideas or contribute to policy discussions outside of academic circles may find social media an expedient tool.But increasingly, scientists and other professionals are discovering that online platforms can be a double-edged sword: while sharing their work and expertise is crucial for visibility and meeting funder expectations, it also exposes them to baseless criticism and even accusations of spreading false information."It is getting harder and harder for scientists, and researchers in general, to convey their findings without facing attacks on their legitimacy and accuracy of their research," says Valère Ndior, a professor of public law at the University of Western Brittany in Brest, France, who has spent more than a decade studying misinformation on social media. Researchers attempting to challenge deceptive online information may themselves be accused of political bias or not being objective in their research, he explains, adding that some scientists disengage because they feel overwhelmed and unable to sustain meaningful dialogue. "It is quite sad to see in some instances that researchers end up leaving social media altogether because they feel like the pressure is getting too intense or feel threatened," he says.Ndior, a past president of the Francophone Network of International Law, is also involved in European efforts to make science and research findings more accessible to the public. As an ambassador for the Science Comes to Town (SCTT) project, he has participated in recent discussions on public perceptions of science and online misinformation. The European Commission-funded initiative connects Brest and two other cities — Kiel in Germany and Split in Croatia — and aims to strengthen ties between communities, universities and research institutions to promote science awareness and cooperation across Europe.Coordinated campaigns around contentious topicsNdior draws a clear distinction between critical thinking and thoughtless criticism. Yet he sees online discussions being increasingly shaped by suspicious behaviour and coordinated information campaigns — including "raids" aimed at dominating discussions and "astroturfing," where small groups act as larger movements to sway debates. Tracking these patterns has become harder because some platforms have restricted data or charge for it, despite provisions of the European Union's Digital Securities Act aimed at ensuring researchers can have access to such data. According to Ndior, "platforms became more reluctant from the moment access to data became a legal requirement rather than a voluntary initiative."Unfounded claims and scepticism about science existed long before Internet chat groups. But the noticeable rise in online hostility has intensified around contentious topics, such as the coronavirus pandemic and climate change, alongside the weakening of gatekeepers to moderate content.For Ndior, dubious claims about pandemic countermeasures and vaccine safety highlighted the struggle between "balancing freedom of expression and the protection of public health and order." Efforts to remove social media content deemed false or risky for public health triggered accusations of censorship and the silencing of legitimate discussion, and in some cases, legal challenges.Concerns about attacks on the credibility of scientists and researchers have generated a flurry of academic papers in recent years and prompted professional communities to address ways to counter online attacks. Such unease extends to the generation that has grown up with digital media. Ndior points out that his students, some of whom research artificial intelligence regulation, hate speech, online surveillance and other controversial topics, hesitate to share their work or viewpoints online. "Many of them don't want to expose themselves too much because they don't feel ready to be faced with the backlash of other people criticising their research," he explains.Safer harbours for engagementLegal challenges against false or defamatory posts are not necessarily a solution — especially given the trans-jurisdictional nature of the Internet. Lawsuits also take time and money, and if they fail, can be counterproductive. Instead, Ndior advises scientists and researchers to be selective in how and where they communicate. Professional online platforms and moderated discussion spaces offer a better environment for engagement. He also highlights the value of more traditional formats, such as radio interviews and in-person discussions at schools, libraries and science fairs, which encourage dialogue with the public. "Personal contact makes a big difference," he says, while acknowledging that these approaches lack the global reach of social media.Ndior’s interest in digital law and online misinformation stems from his time as a doctoral student in international law in the early days of social media. He began analysing posts from governments and heads of state to determine if they could be considered official and thus used as evidence in litigation. His work attracted media attention and led to conference and speaking invitations. "This was not part of my plan," he says, "but this is what happens as a researcher — your interest is sparked by a certain event or phenomenon, and it suddenly becomes your focus."Ndior believes SCTT provides "a double benefit" for researchers, enabling them to connect with peers and interact with the public. "There is a wide community of people who are not in academia who are critical thinkers looking for opportunities to ask questions, to get information and contribute their ideas,” he says. "I really value that kind of feedback."Science|Business, which connects policymakers, academics and industry through its news reporting, analysis and events, is an SCTT partner.
Navigating the social media minefield
Scientists and researchers seeking to announce promising findings, exchange ideas or contribute to policy discussions outside of academic circles may find social media an expedient tool.But increasingly, scientists and other professionals are discovering that online platforms can be a double-edged sword: while sharing their work and expertise is crucial for visibility and meeting funder expectations, it also exposes them to baseless criticism and even accusations of spreading false information."It is getting harder and harder for scientists, and researchers in general, to convey their findings without facing attacks on their legitimacy and accuracy of their research," says Valère Ndior, a professor of public law at the University of Western Brittany in Brest, France, who has spent more than a decade studying misinformation on social media. Researchers attempting to challenge deceptive online information may themselves be accused of political bias or not being objective in their research, he explains, adding that some scientists disengage because they feel overwhelmed and unable to sustain meaningful dialogue. "It is quite sad to see in some instances that researchers end up leaving social media altogether because they feel like the pressure is getting too intense or feel threatened," he says.Ndior, a past president of the Francophone Network of International Law, is also involved in European efforts to make science and research findings more accessible to the public. As an ambassador for the Science Comes to Town (SCTT) project, he has participated in recent discussions on public perceptions of science and online misinformation. The European Commission-funded initiative connects Brest and two other cities — Kiel in Germany and Split in Croatia — and aims to strengthen ties between communities, universities and research institutions to promote science awareness and cooperation across Europe.Coordinated campaigns around contentious topicsNdior draws a clear distinction between critical thinking and thoughtless criticism. Yet he sees online discussions being increasingly shaped by suspicious behaviour and coordinated information campaigns — including "raids" aimed at dominating discussions and "astroturfing," where small groups act as larger movements to sway debates. Tracking these patterns has become harder because some platforms have restricted data or charge for it, despite provisions of the European Union's Digital Securities Act aimed at ensuring researchers can have access to such data. According to Ndior, "platforms became more reluctant from the moment access to data became a legal requirement rather than a voluntary initiative."Unfounded claims and scepticism about science existed long before Internet chat groups. But the noticeable rise in online hostility has intensified around contentious topics, such as the coronavirus pandemic and climate change, alongside the weakening of gatekeepers to moderate content.For Ndior, dubious claims about pandemic countermeasures and vaccine safety highlighted the struggle between "balancing freedom of expression and the protection of public health and order." Efforts to remove social media content deemed false or risky for public health triggered accusations of censorship and the silencing of legitimate discussion, and in some cases, legal challenges.Concerns about attacks on the credibility of scientists and researchers have generated a flurry of academic papers in recent years and prompted professional communities to address ways to counter online attacks. Such unease extends to the generation that has grown up with digital media. Ndior points out that his students, some of whom research artificial intelligence regulation, hate speech, online surveillance and other controversial topics, hesitate to share their work or viewpoints online. "Many of them don't want to expose themselves too much because they don't feel ready to be faced with the backlash of other people criticising their research," he explains.Safer harbours for engagementLegal challenges against false or defamatory posts are not necessarily a solution — especially given the trans-jurisdictional nature of the Internet. Lawsuits also take time and money, and if they fail, can be counterproductive. Instead, Ndior advises scientists and researchers to be selective in how and where they communicate. Professional online platforms and moderated discussion spaces offer a better environment for engagement. He also highlights the value of more traditional formats, such as radio interviews and in-person discussions at schools, libraries and science fairs, which encourage dialogue with the public. "Personal contact makes a big difference," he says, while acknowledging that these approaches lack the global reach of social media.Ndior’s interest in digital law and online misinformation stems from his time as a doctoral student in international law in the early days of social media. He began analysing posts from governments and heads of state to determine if they could be considered official and thus used as evidence in litigation. His work attracted media attention and led to conference and speaking invitations. "This was not part of my plan," he says, "but this is what happens as a researcher — your interest is sparked by a certain event or phenomenon, and it suddenly becomes your focus."Ndior believes SCTT provides "a double benefit" for researchers, enabling them to connect with peers and interact with the public. "There is a wide community of people who are not in academia who are critical thinkers looking for opportunities to ask questions, to get information and contribute their ideas,” he says. "I really value that kind of feedback."Science|Business, which connects policymakers, academics and industry through its news reporting, analysis and events, is an SCTT partner.
Hingham Schools Eye Business Curriculum Expansion as Class Size Concerns Mount
HINGHAM - March 23, 2026 - The Hingham School Committee moved to modernize its high school offerings Monday night, reviewing a comprehensive plan to expand the “small but mighty” Business Department while simultaneously grappling with data that places Hingham as an outlier in elementary class sizes. Director of Social Studies Andy Hoey presented a two-year program review that highlighted the department’s success in community partnerships but warned that high student demand is testing current staffing limits. Meanwhile, committee Chair Jen Benham presented independent research showing Hingham is the only benchmark district with second-grade classes hitting a 25-student cap, sparking a directive for the Policy Subcommittee to review class-size standards. Editors note: South Shore News is going paid in April, subscribe now to make sure you don’t miss a story. Reach out for group or organizational pricing. Subscribe The Full Story The meeting opened with a look into the future of Hingham High School’s (HHS) curriculum. Andy Hoey, who oversees the Business Department, presented the first formal program review for the department since 2009. [15:09] Hoey characterized the department as a vital elective hub that currently serves between 14% and 27% of the HHS student body in any given year. [31:31] “We are very proud of our business department here at Hingham High School... while we’re very proud of it, we are always striving to make improvements and enhancements.” [15:55] — Andy Hoey, Director of Social Studies A key highlight of the presentation was the announcement of a new AP Business with Personal Finance course launching next year, pending enrollment. [20:08] The review team found that while the program is “well-aligned” to national standards, it remains a high-school-only offering. Hoey outlined an action plan to explore “vertical articulation,” potentially introducing business or financial literacy units at the middle school level to fill a “gap” identified between fifth and eighth grade. [41:48] However, the department faces “smoke and mirrors” regarding student GPA, according to Hoey. Currently, most business courses are “unleveled” and do not count toward a student’s GPA, which survey data suggests may deter some students from enrolling. [28:15] The committee discussed the possibility of offering Honors or College Prep (CP) credit for advanced courses, such as investing or marketing, to better reflect their academic rigor. [38:27] The discussion took a sharp turn toward elementary education during an enrollment update. Superintendent Dr. Katie Roberts noted a net gain of four students mid-year, but it was Jen Benham’s “rabbit hole” data analysis that caught the committee’s attention. [50:35] Benham researched 13 benchmark towns—representing 34 elementary schools—and found that Hingham was the only district with a second-grade section reaching 25 students this year. [51:36] Benham’s findings suggested that while many districts lack formal class-size policies, Hingham’s current cap of 25 for second grade may be too high. “I think if we could at least have 23 at a cap for grade two,” Benham suggested, noting the importance of that grade level for literacy development. [53:09], [54:55] Dr. Roberts cautioned that smaller classes require more staff, which is a significant hurdle following a budget season where nine general education positions were cut across the district. [55:56] The committee also finalized the 2025 Town Report, which was updated to be more “student-centered” and highlight staff early in the document. [11:12] Additionally, a series of food service policies were approved to align with Massachusetts’ universal free school meal mandate, including new protocols for meal modifications due to allergies or religious needs. [59:23] Share Why It Matters The meeting underscored a tension between Hingham’s desire to offer elite, specialized programming and the foundational pressure of class sizes. The expansion of the Business Department—including potential Microsoft certifications and AP courses—aims to prepare students for a “real world” where credit scores and financial literacy are paramount. [46:20] However, the revelation that Hingham’s second-grade classes are larger than those in all neighboring benchmark towns suggests a potential strain on early education that could impact long-term student performance if not addressed by the Policy Subcommittee. Official Minutes & Data Key Motions & Votes Motion: To approve the Hingham Public Schools 2025 Town Report. [13:16] Vote: Unanimous (7-0) ([01:13:28]) Motion: To approve the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for summer counselor work regarding course placement. [57:33] Vote: Unanimous (7-0) ([57:50]) Motion: To approve Policy EFBA (School Food and Nutrition/Meal Modifications). [01:00:32] Vote: Unanimous (7-0) ([01:00:44]) Motion: To approve Policy EFC (Universal Free School Meals). [01:00:54] Vote: Unanimous (7-0) ([01:01:07]) Public Comment No members of the public spoke during the meeting or via the remote link. [01:02:30] What’s Next The Policy Subcommittee will take up the review of elementary class-size caps over the next year to determine if the Grade 2 limit should be lowered from 25 to 23. [52:18] The Business Department will monitor enrollment for the new AP Business course and continue exploring dual-enrollment partnerships with Quincy College. [38:13] Source Video: Harbor Media South Shore News is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
UFC Seattle live results, highlights and play-by-play
UFC Seattle results, highlights, live discussion and instant play-by-play, reactions and analysis.
Game Discussion for St. Louis Cardinals vs Tampa Bay Rays
After a rousing come from behind Opening Day victory, the St. Louis Cardinals will attempt to maintain their perfect 2026 record with a Saturday afternoon game versus the Tampa Bay Rays. According to MLB.com, Michael McGreevy will make the start for the Cardinals while Joe Boyle will take the mound for the Rays. Here’s the […]
Representative Bratten Discusses Wyoming Business Council
Leading up to the 2026 Budget Session of the Wyoming Legislature, there was a lot of discussion about dissolving the Wyoming Business Council. Lawmakers ultimately chose not to disband the economic agency. Sheridan Media’s Ron Richter has more. The Wyoming Legislature agreed to fund the Wyoming Business Council for a year with the stipulation that […]
Business leaders and legislators gather for discussion in Youngstown
The movers and shakers of the Valley got together for breakfast Friday morning, hoping to make some connections.
United Healthcare, ECU Health pause contract talks as price dispute puts coverage in focus
Discussions around healthcare could impact people across Eastern North Carolina,United Healthcare and ECU Health have paused negotiations on a new contract and
Suffolk town supervisors, on business panel, discuss what lies ahead
Waste management, sewers, housing stock, and an expanded MacArthur airport all were topics of discussion Thursday at the HIA-LI event.
Penn State Schuylkill sponsors Business Executive Forum with provost
Penn State Schuylkill recently sponsored the Schuylkill Chamber of Commerce’s first Business Executive Forum of 2026 on March 18, marking the 10th year the campus has hosted the event and brought together more than 100 business and community leaders, along with local and state legislators and several University leaders, for a discussion on leadership and the future of work.
Algonquin Anishinabe Nation and Senators Sports & Entertainment Joint Statement
Through ongoing discussions, both parties have identified a strong alignment in their commitment to creating Ottawa–Gatineau’s next great gathering place
Pokémon Champions' removal of IVs led to a "heated discussion" with one of the franchise's original devs
Settle it...with a Pokémon battle!
‘Science Friday’ Host Ira Flatow to Share Health and Wellness Discoveries on April 23
Are ultramarathoners built differently from the rest of us? What can Greenland sharks teach us about aging eyes? As the longtime host of the popular public radio program and podcast Science Friday, Ira Flatow explores questions like these during engaging discussions on topics ranging from science and technology to health, space and the environment.
AHA launches custom innovation summits, revamped reducing disparities in health outcomes webpage
The AHA is now offering custom innovation summits — proven, high-impact workshops designed to convene health care leaders and co-design solutions for organizations committed to reducing health disparities.
AI Science Startup Periodic Labs Is in Deal Talks at About $7 Billion Valuation
Periodic Labs, an artificial intelligence research startup founded last year by former OpenAI and DeepMind staffers, is having discussions with investors about raising at least hundreds of millions of dollars at a valuation of about $7 billion, according to people familiar with the matter.
Caldara overlooked facts in slamming utilities
Normally, I appreciate the variety of perspectives published on Colorado Politics. But regarding Jon Caldara’s recent column on Xcel, he irresponsibly neglects key facts to the point of annihilating credibility (“Are our overlords normalizing power outages?” March 15). He neglects any discussion regarding the nuance of safety (or fiduciary responsibility) versus inconvenience, for example: Is […]
Health Ring Oura Interviews Banks for IPO as Soon as This Year
Health ring Oura has been interviewing bankers to advise on an initial public offering that could take place as soon as this year, according to a person with direct knowledge of discussions. A public offering would follow fast growth at the company, which sells connected devices—which cost from ...
Blog explains why context matters in discussions on health care spending
An AHA blog published March 24 responds to a recent KFF brief on the role of hospital care in recent health care spending growth.
Notre Dame, NBC Sports panel reflects on 20 years of ‘What Would You Fight For?’ storytelling
On Thursday (March 19), the University of Notre Dame hosted an event celebrating 20 years of storytelling through the “What Would You Fight For?” (WWYFF) campaign. Part of the 2025-26 Notre Dame Forum, the panel discussion brought together leaders from the University and NBC Sports to reflect on the impact and evolution of this storytelling platform.
UCLA Health podcast shines a light on colorectal cancer prevention, early detection and rising risks
UCLA Health's podcast episode on colorectal cancer, featuring Dr. Eve Glazier, Katie Couric and Dr. Fola May, highlights the critical need for prevention and early detection amid rising risks, particularly among younger adults. The discussion focuses on cancer screening, lifestyle modifications and advocacy to reduce the incidence of this disease.
Health Care Access for Women: The Cost of Being Dismissed, March 26
The event will feature a panel and table discussions focused on strategies for women to more effectively advocate for themselves in health care settings.
We disagreed on politics. We agreed on wine. That was enough.
At the Virginia Governor’s Cup Gala in Richmond earlier this month, a very dapper gentleman approached me and introduced himself. In his light-colored suit and bowtie, he looked very Southern in a classical sense, the sort of Virginia Gentleman you used to see south of the Rappahannock as recently as my college days. “I’m a longtime reader and fan of your writing, if not your politics,” he said. His comment was the proverbial iron fist in a velvet glove, simultaneously conveying praise and disapproval while establishing boundaries. Man, I wish we still discoursed like this instead of shouting bromides and insults to try and “own” our opponents with a funny meme and a furrowed brow. Subscribe “Well, we’ll always have wine to share together,” I said, and thanked him for his kind words. We clinked glasses, exchanged pleasantries about the delicious gold medal-winning wines being poured that evening, and went our separate ways. Our exchange reminded me that more unites us than divides us. Wine brings people together to share a meal and a few hours of joy despite our differences.1 That’s why I refer to the wine community — including readers and consumers — rather than the wine industry. Together, we are so much more than production, distribution and sales statistics. A few minutes later the evening’s awards ceremony began. Applause grew as the 12 winemakers who made the top-scoring wines for the Governor’s Case took the stage, including a loud cheer for Jonathan Wheeler of Trump Winery and his 2018 Blanc de Noir sparkling wine. All the winemakers on stage had reason to be proud, Wheeler perhaps more so. Trump Winery was the only winery to win six gold medals in the competition this year. (Wineries are limited to six entries.) Two of Wheeler’s ciders also won gold medals in a separate competition. When you cover the labels and take the sour taste of politics off your palate, the wines are pretty darn good.2 Then Gov. Abigail Spanberger, newly elected Democrat and Virginia’s first female governor, was introduced to great applause to announce which of the 12 wines had won the Governor’s Cup. She spoke for a few minutes about the importance of wine to Virginia’s economy and tourism and the international acclaim Virginia wine has received. Just two weeks earlier, she gave the Democrats’ response to Trump’s State of the Union speech, but this night wasn’t about politics. That didn’t stop several people in the crowd from speculating on the irony should she have to present the trophy to Trump Winery. In the end, Valley Road Vineyards was displayed on the screen behind Spanberger as the winning winery. Blue Bee Cidery in Richmond took top honors for that category. The crowd cheered a female governor presenting the state’s highest trophy to a female winemaker and then resumed the evening’s festivities, united by their mutual love of wine. A whiff of politics couldn’t dim the cheer of celebration and a community united by its love of wine. In Memoriam: Michel Rolland The global wine community lost a giant March 20, with the passing of Michel Rolland. He was 78. Rolland was the original “flying winemaker,” a globe-trotting consultant who helped Bordeaux regain its mojo in the 1970s and then shaped the rise of Napa Valley cult Cabernet as consultant to Simi, Harlan, Newton, Screaming Eagle, Araujo, Dalle Valle and other wineries. He was instrumental in Argentina’s rise to prominence and even had his own winery, Clos de los Siete, in a partnership with other wine families. Rolland’s career arc paralleled that of Robert Parker, the world’s most influential critic. Parker championed many of the wines Rolland consulted on, helping build his reputation and demand for his services. It also made him a target for Parker’s critics. As W. Blake Gray wrote on Wine-Searcher in his excellent tribute to Rolland: Rolland created the type of wines Parker loved: rich body, plenty of fruit, soft tannins. He sometimes faced the accusation of creating a generic international style of red wine, where the great wines he made in Argentina were indistinguishable from the great wines he made in France. Rolland chafed at that critique, as did many of his fans. He was credited with championing green harvesting and leaf pulling, as well as careful selection of grapes in the winery, practices we nearly universally think of today for high-quality winemaking. “Michel was an incredible innovator who changed how wine was made and how grapes were grown,” Napa Valley winemaker Aaron Pott wrote on Facebook. “His work has transformed the wine trade. He created new ways of looking at wine, tasting wine, evaluating ripeness and quality. … This was not just a man with a ‘style’ that he imposed on vineyards but a man that understood how to make great wine from great sites.” Rolland started his consulting company in 1973 in Libourne, in Bordeaux, with his wife, Dany. Both had graduated the year before from Bordeaux’s Institute d’Oenologie. The couple sold their majority share in the business in 2020, according to Wine Spectator. Over his career, Rolland reportedly worked with more than 100 wineries in 20 countries. He even made it to Virginia, where he consulted for Kluge Estate in the mid-2000s. (Kluge Estate is now Trump Winery.) Reader feedback, please! Last week, I did my first WineLine Live! with Dr. Laura Catena of Catena Zapata winery in Argentina. We enjoyed a fascinating discussion about her efforts to preserve the genetic heritage of old vineyards in Mendoza. I conceived of WineLine Live! for paid subscribers, as a thank you for your financial support. And while only a few people joined live, the video now has more views than I have paid subscribers, so I guess that’s pretty good. Even so, I’m considering opening future installments to anyone on Substack to reach a broader audience. So my questions to you: Should these be public? And what format do you prefer? Live gives a chat feature with the potential for viewers to interact with me and the guest, while a video post would just be that. Another alternative is a podcast, which would just be audio, without video of my chins. Please let me know in the comments. Leave a comment In the Glass A few wines I’ve enjoyed recently: Bonny Doon Vineyard Take Me to Your Liter, Le Cigare Volant, Red Wine of the Earth. 2023, Central Coast, CA. Blend of Grenache, Syrah Cinsaut and Petite Sirah. Delightful wine with expressive red fruit flavors, casual drinking. Doon lovers of a certain age will remember Randall Grahm’s Big House Red; this is more in that style than his original Le Cigare Volant, modeled after Chateauneuf du Pape. The liter bottle makes it an even better value. I see this online at about $15. Great value. Albert Bichot Bourgogne Pinot Noir Origines 2023. 13% - Textbook pinot noir and an excellent, affordable entry (regional) Burgundy. Wine Enthusiast Top 100 Wines of 2025. $24 at Total Wine & More. Loma Larga Pinot Noir 2021 “Coastal Cool Climate Wine”, Valle de Casablanca, Chile. An older sample, showing beautifully. Spicy and fruit forward. I’m seeing widely varied pricing online, from $18-$32. At the lower end, it’s a terrific value. 13.5% Dr. Loosen Riesling Dry 2016, Mosel, Germany. Found this “in the stack.” And it stacked up well, shedding some of its youthful acidity for opulent Riesling character, including a hint of the mineral oil older Riesling often features. A great value, as I’m seeing it as low as $14 online. 12% abv. Red Tail Ridge Blau Franc Blend 2024, Sans Oak, Finger Lakes. 13.4% abv. The name is a neat portmanteau of Blaufrankisch and Cabernet Franc, thus Blau Franc. The blend is 50-50, no oak involved. The Blau dominates on the palate, with the spicy caraway seed (think New York deli rye bread). The Franc adds body. The result is juicy, energetic and joyful. Sokol Blosser Estate Rosé of Pinot Noir 2025, Dundee Hills, Willamette Valley, Oregon. This first rosé of 2025 was a welcome respite to our cold, snowy winter here in the Mid-Atlantic. Oh man, I needed this! Bright and energetic, exuberant even, it perks up the mood and goes down fast. 13%. Certified B Corp. Ingredient and nutrition labeling, and in a modest way that doesn’t occupy a lot of label space. (Since it’s not required, presumably there are no minimum font size requirements.) More wineries should follow this example. Dave McIntyre's WineLine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe Thanks for reading Dave McIntyre's WineLine! This post is public so feel free to share it. Share 1 Some restraint may be required. 2 Especially the bubblies.
Segment: Financing Action on Extreme Heat and Maternal and Newborn Health: The Way Forward
The segment “Financing Action on Extreme Heat and Maternal and Newborn Health: The Way Forward” will examine how innovative and better-aligned financing approaches can respond to these growing risks. Discussions will highlight country experiences in mobilizing domestic resources, opportunities to unlock and scale climate finance, and the role of heat-smart innovations in building resilient health systems. Particular attention will be given to low- and middle-income countries, where exposure and vulnerability remain highest, and where integrated solutions can deliver the greatest impact.
'American people long for civility,' former VP Pence tells University of Tennessee students
In a frank discussion about America's future. Pence says \
Apple Wanted to Buy Halide to Boost iPhone 18 Pro's Camera App—Now There's a Lawsuit
Apple's plans to enhance the iPhone 18 Pro's Camera app led it to consider acquiring Halide, but the talks ultimately collapsed and were followed by a fierce legal dispute between the startup's co-founders, according to The Information reports. In the summer of 2025, Apple reportedly held discussions to acquire Lux Optics, the developer behind the popular iPhone camera apps Halide, Kino, and Spectre.
Minnesota Blue Cross CEO steps down from Sutter Health board over conflict of interest
The Eagan-based insurer says CEO Dana Erickson was recused from Sutter board discussions on acquiring Allina Health, which provides care to many Blue Cross members.
Trump weighing several options for U.S. troops inside Iran
Discussions about possible ground troops have focused on missions aimed at escalating the war in attempt to end it, sources say, but no decisions have been made.
Unilever Confirms Talks on McCormick Offer for Food Business
Unilever Plc said it’s in discussions to sell its food business to McCormick & Co. in a major shift for the maker of Hellmann’s mayonnaise.
Jeff Bezos aims to raise $100 billion to buy, revamp manufacturing firms with AI, WSJ reports
Jeff Bezos is in early discussions to raise $100 billion for a new fund that would acquire manufacturing companies and seek to use AI to drive and speed up automation, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
Science stars at special UChicago, Argonne screening of ‘Project Hail Mary’
Researchers and students marked the new film with a panel discussion, hands-on science demos and a shared love of discovery
Forum on harnessing Artificial Intelligence for health equity
Register to this forumOver the past decade, artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly evolved in complexity, performance, and utility. Its integration across a wide range of industrial sectors has accelerated, with healthcare emerging as one of the most transformative sectors. In this sector, AI has enabled high-impact applications – from enhancing the speed and accuracy of disease diagnosis and supporting clinical decision-making, to strengthening public health initiatives such as disease surveillance and workforce optimization. Moreover, AI holds immense potential to empower individuals, enabling them to take greater control of their personal health and well-being. Yet the central question remains: Who benefits, who is at risk, and do these innovations close or widen health inequities? While the potential of AI-enabled applications is substantial, many countries have approached their adoption with caution. This hesitancy stems from concerns about risks and benefits, including model bias, data breaches, privacy violations, and the erosion of professional skills due to over-reliance on AI. Additional barriers include inadequate data infrastructure and a lack of robust evidence on the most effective forms and interfaces of AI to enhance service delivery and system performance. Moreover, the rapid rise of Generative AI has introduced a heightened urgency for the development of comprehensive governance and ethical frameworks. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) Health Practice Team and Digital Sector, in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for the Western Pacific, are convening the Forum on Harnessing AI for Health Equity on 25–26 March at ADB Headquarters. Senior health officials from 16 developing member countries (DMCs), alongside leading researchers, innovators, and policymakers from across Asia and the Pacific, will engage in discussions on how AI can be governed, financed, and scaled to deliver healthier lives for all. The forum is funded through the High-Level Technology Fund with support from the Government of Japan. Objectives The two-day forum aims to:Identify high-impact, evidence-based health AI use cases suitable for resource-constrained settings and map out a pipeline for potential supportIntroduce and validate the WHO's policy guidance on minimum necessary ecosystem for countries and institutions to self-assess readiness for AI adoptionObtain initial commitment from participating stakeholders to join a pilot regional initiative focused on data/model sharing for a priority health challengeEndorse a prioritized set of actionable policy recommendations focusing on governance, regulation, and sustainable financing necessary to scale high-impact health AI use cases in resource-constrained settings Target participants The forum will convene participants from 16 ADB DMCs including Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Mongolia, Nepal, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Viet Nam. In addition, health system leaders and practitioners, private sector technologists, academic experts, representatives from civil society organizations, development partners, and philanthropic institutions engaged in AI for Health from Australia, the People’s Republic of China, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, and the Republic of Korea will also be invited. SessionsDay 1 (25 March)Session 1: AI Use Cases for the Care Continuum: Improving Access and QualitySession 2: Adopting a risk-based approach for AI use case prioritizationSession 3: Establishing the Minimum Ecosystem for Implementation Risk ManagementSession 4: Future-Ready Health Workforce: Building Competency for Human-AI CollaborationDay 2 (26 March)Session 5: The Political Economy of AI in Health: Understanding Stakeholder Interests and their Impact on EquitySession 6: AI and Health Financing: Supporting Fair Coverage and ProtectionSession 7: AI Regulation and Oversight: Pathways for Different RealitiesSession 8: The Way Forward – Building Alliances and Regional Partnership How to registerThe forum will be held in a hybrid format. In-person attendance is by invitation only, while livestreaming of the forum will be available to the public. To register, please complete this form on or before 24 March 2026.Event organizers / partnersAsian Development Bank (ADB)WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific High-Level Technology Fund (HLTF)ContactAkihito WatabeHealth Specialist, SD3-HSDawatabe@adb.org Jae Kyoun KimHealth Specialist, SD3-HSDjkkim@adb.org
ICF International Flags 2026 Growth Rebound as Federal Headwinds Ease, Energy Business Accelerates
ICF International (NASDAQ:ICFI) executives outlined the company’s business mix, recent federal headwinds, and growth priorities during a discussion hosted by Canaccord Genuity Senior Research Analyst Jason Tilchin. Anne Choate, president, and Kyle Wiggins, senior vice president for Energy, Environme
Iran negotiating with FIFA to move World Cup games to Mexico from US
Iran’s soccer federation is in discussions with FIFA about moving their World Cup matches to Mexico from the United States due to concerns about the safety of their players, Iranian soccer president Mehdi Taj said on Monday.
Smith: politics and big oil slow nationwide year-round E15 push
A U.S. Senator from Minnesota says politics have made nationwide, year-round E15 an interesting topic of discussion in the Senate. “It’s hard to find someone who opposes it, yet you really can’t get it done.” Tina Smith tells Brownfield “let’s be honest. I think there are U.S. Senators who have big oil interests in their […]
Partisanship and science
I recently participated in a symposium of the Denver-based Institute for Science & Policy, during which I had a “fireside chat” with Tony Mills of the American Enterprise Institute. Mills has written extensively on the politicization of science, and the two of us had a very enjoyable hour-long conversation on the topic. You can watch it below. The main questions we dealt with are why there is such a vast partisan gap in trust of science, and to what extent this is a unique moment. Mills helpfully brings a good deal of data to the discussion, as he did in this useful piece at Issues in Science & Technology. Tusk depends on reader support. To support this work, please become a paid subscriber. Subscribe Note this graph, drawing on a range of survey data to demonstrate partisan attitudes toward science since 1970s. As it demonstrates, there’s been a very sharp partisan divergence in confidence in science during the Trump Era, starting prior to the Covid pandemic. At least in part, we can attribute this to a rise in populist anti-science rhetoric embraced by Trump, his appointees, and those in his media orbit. But as the graph also shows, the partisan divide has existed in the past, and it’s not always in the same direction. The largest divergence in party views toward science prior to 2016 was in the 1970s, when liberals equated scientific achievement with the military-industrial complex and thus trusted it less. That era of scientific mistrust is often overlooked. Indeed, as Mills notes, the Moon landings (1969-72), which today are considered one of the last great moments of national unity, were experienced nothing like that at the time. There was sharp debate back then over whether the Apollo missions were worth the vast expenditures when the country had so much else to deal with. It’s outside the dataset, and we don’t have the partisanship lens for it, but the 1950s was another deeply anti-science decade, with critics of intellectuals and college professors alleging their ties to communism and their lack of commitment to basic American moral beliefs. This was the subject of Richard Hofstadter’s 1962 book Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, in which he quotes religious leaders like Franklin Graham: [In place of the Bible] we substituted reason, rationalism, mind culture, science worship, the working power of government, Freudianism, naturalism, humanism, behaviorism, positivism, materialism, and idealism. [This is the work of] so-called intellectuals. Thousands of these “intellectuals” have publicly stated that morality is relative—that there is no norm or absolute standard.… This fervor was heavily whipped up by Sen. Joe McCarthy (R-Wisconsin), although it’s clear that not all his fellow Republicans were on board with his red-baiting. What ended that era? The simple answer is the 1957 launch of Sputnik. Americans became afraid that they were losing to Soviet scientists, and suddenly university researchers and government projects were awash with funding. In our conversation, I asked Mills about the possibility of us having a Sputnik moment again that would rally the American public in favor of science today. Mills argued that the COVID-19 pandemic was essentially a Sputnik moment — a terrifying threat to all Americans that required scientific advances to address. But thanks in part to political polarization and the populist and conspiratorial leanings of Donald Trump, we got the opposite of a unifying moment. Many Americans turned against science, despite science actually stepping up in that moment. As we discussed in the chat, it’s not clear what scientists could or should be doing in this moment to increase faith in their work. As Mills notes, one of the chief complaints against scientists and professors is that they’ve become too political; scholars becoming even more political might not help them achieve their goals. This (mainly Republican-driven) anti-science era will end, of course, but it’s not clear what event will bring that about. Share
City of Mobile sponsoring mental health discussion for teens Monday
The post says its an opportunity for young people to engage in open and honest conversations with trained mental health professionals who are there to listen and support.
MHA Members and Business Leaders Join Crain’s for Healthcare Affordability Roundtable
The MHA partnered with Crain’s Content Studio to facilitate a healthcare affordability discussion, which was highlighted in its Detroit and Grand Rapids publications.