SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " surprising " 1,243 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Analyst Declares Jaguars His Early Super Bowl Pick
Despite a criticized offseason and persistent national doubt, Peter Schrager is backing the Jaguars to silence critics with a surprising Super Bowl run this season.
Scientists left water inside a battery and nearly doubled its power
A surprisingly simple change could make sodium-ion batteries far more powerful while opening the door to turning seawater into drinking water. Researchers at the University of Surrey found that sodium vanadium oxide performs much better when its naturally occurring water is left inside instead of being removed during manufacturing.
4 Surprising Ways AI Is Helping Ordinary Businesses Reach $1 Million Faster
Turn your expertise into leverage before your competitors do.
Upfront: Kind of a Big Dill
This month’s magazine isn’t titled the Mount Olive edition. Maybe it should be. Columnist Dan Barkin writes about the surprising turnaround at the University of Mount Olive. It’s a vital part of the town whose more than 4,500 residents live in Duplin or Wayne counties, 70 miles southeast of Raleigh. President Ed Croom clearly understands […]
Former Tennessee senator shares lessons from decades in public service
Through his decades of public service, one might expect former U.S. Senator of Tennessee Lamar Alexander to offer complicated guidance on what makes a successful and long-lived career. But his insights are surprisingly simple: “Lose your sense of purpose, and there's really not much reason to be in public life.” At a virtual event held by the McCain Institute on July 23, Alexander discussed his latest book, “The Education of a Senator: From JFK to Trump.” The memoir was published in May of this year.
Does public health *need* MAHA?
Last week, our friend Dr. Craig Spencer sparked an ongoing volatile discussion with his Atlantic article “Public Health Needs MAHA.” Some have come out in strong dissent, others are cheering, and others are simply lamenting that we find ourselves in such a divided world to begin with. We will dare to dip our toes in these controversial waters, too. Does public health need MAHA? We think in some ways yes, and in other ways, no. MAHA leaders versus the everyday MAHA supporter The vitriol in this debate mostly comes from one collapsed distinction: the leadership of MAHA is not necessarily the same as the people who support it. Say “MAHA” and most people picture RFK Jr. Fair enough, as he coined the term and holds most of the power. And, yes, some MAHA followers treat Kennedy as something close to a saint. But talk to the grassroots, and it’s not a monolith. They’re Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. People who distrust vaccines and vaccine supporters. It’s a wide, eclectic coalition. The data backs this too: 4 in 10 Americans support the movement—that’s a lot of people! But according to polls, vaccines and medical choice (the issues most tied to Kennedy personally) are cited by only 4% as their reason for supporting the movement. For many, the motivations are much broader. Many MAHA supporters are signing up for the idea that “something needs to change” with health in this country. They’re asking good-faith questions about corporate influence on our health systems, health care costs, nutrition, chemicals, and clean air and water. These are all questions that plenty of public health professionals recognize as legitimate and also care about very deeply. Blurring the lines between the leadership and grassroots does real damage in two important ways: It hands the 4 in 10 exactly the narrative already fed—that the health ecosystem doesn’t listen, doesn’t care, and paints every critic with the same brush. It gives the actual bad actor more power. RFK Jr. has done irreparable damage and can’t be trusted. What the MAHA movement gets right A healthy population is something the public health field was literally built on, and many of these topics are things we have dedicated our lives to. Yet the MAHA movement has captivated nearly half the country in a way the public health establishment has failed to achieve. So that means MAHA is doing something right. Some of it may be timing (after a Covid-19 pandemic and deep frustration and mistrust with institutions). The movement also does three other things really well: 1. It gives a new, louder voice to system failures. While MAHA is not a monolith, one theme stays consistent across their stories: the system failed them. For some, it was the system that flooded their communities with opioids and then walked away. For others, it was the system that let their business collapse during Covid with no safety net in sight. For others still, it was the system that failed to help them manage a complex chronic illness, bouncing them from physician to physician without any real answers. And in many ways, our health ecosystems are failing Americans. Why are medical bills so incomprehensible? Why do some kids get a healthy school lunch and others don’t? Why do an epidemiologist and a MD/PhD student have to start newsletters in the middle of the biggest public health emergency in a century, just so people can get straight information? Because the systems failed. This deep-seated frustration driving many Americans to search for solutions elsewhere needs to be recognized. 2. MAHA has brilliant comms central to their efforts. MAHA figured out something most health institutions still have not: the information landscape changed. It’s participatory now, not top-down; influence runs through many nodes in a community, not one institution; and storytelling and telling audiences “what you really think” moves people more than data dumps do. MAHA goes where audiences are listening, using podcasts, social media, and memes in ways most health institutions would scoff at—but it works. 3. They are very good at organizing. A MAHA meeting feels like a rally: energy, speakers, music, and most importantly, an action for everyone. Someone’s writing the next policy brief, someone’s seeding a narrative, someone knows the next legislative deadline, someone’s sending the text messages for a campaign. None of this is new (ask the civil rights movement), but MAHA knows it works and has capitalized on it. What MAHA gets wrong This list could be much longer, and this newsletter has spent a lot of time covering it, but here are a few things: Poor use of scientific evidence. This is the fundamental problem with many MAHA policies: the hype outpaces the science, and experts are often villainized for pointing this out. MAHA leadership has traded real solutions for cheap wins. For example, instead of taking on the powerful food industry and passing real reforms, it has celebrated french fries made of beef tallow and taken out artificial dyes from still very sugary children’s cereal. These changes won’t move the needle on America’s diet. MAHA leadership has tried to dismantle vaccine access in the U.S. While many MAHA supporters emphasize other issues, the effort to change vaccine policy has become MAHA’s signature effort. This is not surprising given RFK Jr.’s extensive track record campaigning against vaccines. It has rallied behind the wrong leader. RFK Jr. has a decades-long track record of villifying doctors, scientists, and public health workers, well before he became HHS secretary. He is known for his decades-long work sowing distrust in vaccines as well as life-saving treatments like antiretroviral therapy for HIV. This is not a serious person who can move the needle on health in the U.S, and he has already done serious damage. Public health needs more than defense Defending the evidence is absolutely necessary so health in the U.S. doesn’t move further backward. The public health establishment is very good at defense. The problem is this defense often sounds like defending the status quo, which has failed many people. Public health needs to offer an alternative to RFK Jr.’s MAHA—one that is rooted in evidence, truly listens to and addresses people’s frustrations, and has innovative solutions and the courage to change the systems. How do we get there? Find common ground. Do you know what most people care most about? The abysmal cost of healthcare. Start there. Fight for the human loudly. Too often, communications and engagement center on science with a capital S, funding mechanisms, or the CDC/FDA/NIH. Not the person. So the public doesn’t see themselves in it. Instead, they see people fighting for the very powerful systems that they feel negatively impact their health and well-being. Let the public feel and hear that you see their frustrations, you get it, and you’re fighting for them within the system. Recognize when pro-science messages are alienating people. Facts absolutely matter, but angrily venting only alienates people further. Our friend Elisabeth Marnik recently wrote a New York Times article about her experience growing up unvaccinated and how listening and empathetic conversation are the only ways to reach people that really work (a position backed by communication science). Her comments section was full of hateful comments from pro-vaccine individuals attacking her for daring to suggest we approach vaccine-hesitant individuals with empathy. It is possible to both stand firm behind scientific evidence and empathize with people who don’t trust it. Lean into politics smartly. Often, public health has shied away from politics: Don’t touch it, lest you get burned. But this fails to recognize that the third rail is what fuels the train: who is elected determines our budgets, our priorities, and our authority. Being political means being very savvy in strategy on both sides of the aisle, knowing your audience, and recognizing that political capital is as scarce as financial resources and needs to be allocated accordingly. Bottom line So does public health need MAHA? That’s not really the right question. Public health has a responsibility not to dismiss 40% of the country who feel heard by this movement and are frustrated that the system has failed them. And it has a responsibility to stick to the evidence and recognize MAHA leadership for what it is: a danger to our nation’s health. Both can, and should, be done. Love, YLE and KP A big thanks to Craig Spencer, who had the courage to put his neck out there to start a much-needed discussion at such a critical moment—one that is determining the identity of an entire field. Kristen Panthagani, MD, PhD is completing an emergency medicine residency and research fellowship focusing on health literacy and communication. In her free time, she writes the newsletters You Can Know Things debunking health myths and rumors and The Public Health Roundup. Views expressed belong to KP, not her employer. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
The Hunter Greene trade rumors just won’t stop
Unsurprisingly, teams around the league are asking about Greene’s availability in trade.
The No. 1 Habit That Slowly Dulls Your Sharp Mind, By A Psychologist
New research reveals the surprising habit that quietly dulls a sharp mind — and it's not neglect, it's the competence you've already built up over the years.
The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift
This edition of PN is made possible by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️ 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps. Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) [ Harmeet Dhillon demonstrates danger of posting through it ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Liz Dye · Jul 29 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.” Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies. While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements. Science for dummies Part of how you can tell this isn’t a document about science is that you are immediately faced with an absolute wall of business-speak of the worst sort. Did you know we must “tightly couple our science and technology enterprises to ensure that groundbreaking ideas invented in the United States are rapidly prototyped, tested, manufactured, and scaled domestically”? You do now! That tone isn’t surprising, because Kratsios has no background in science or research. He has a bachelor’s in political science and spent most of his career working for Peter Thiel at Thiel Capital. After a stint in the first Trump administration as Chief Technology Officer, where he also did not do any science, Kratsios was tasked in 2020 with overseeing the Pentagon’s research budget for a brief time, a position that, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “carries a great deal of power in terms of dictating investment allocations.” He spent the Biden years at Scale AI as “head of strategy,” which you will also note is neither a science nor a research job. But Scale AI has contracts with the Department of Defense and, as the Washington Post wrote in 2023, “has been aggressively pitching itself as the company that will help the US military in its existential battle with China.” And now you have the necessary background for our new golden age, which is going to be a golden age of taking money away from scientists and universities and giving it to companies like Scale AI. A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like Lisa takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please become one to support our work. 👇 Subscribe In a genuinely galling move, Katsios spends a lot of time slamming universities because of “administrative burdens on researchers” and the “well-documented inefficiencies” in academia, the message being that those damn universities waste the time of amazing researchers with paperwork. Except it’s the administration that is attempting to impose inefficient, unnecessary burdens on those researchers with a proposed Office of Management and Budget rule that would require senior political appointees to approve every science grant and ensure it aligns with Trump’s personal priorities. Researchers would also have to seek prior government approval to attend conferences or publicize their research. And political appointees could terminate any grant at any time if they feel like it. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) [ The murder of expertise ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) Lisa Needham · Jun 11 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) But when it comes to AI, we’re going to “restore permissionless innovation.” The report proposes to give lucky ducky innovators a pile of cash up front for grants lasting five years or longer, saying “awards should be fully-funded in year one, with all resources earmarked upfront, to minimize administrative burdens and reduce pressure for researchers to generate intermediate results to secure continued funding.” Yeah, wouldn’t want to have to make the Very Special Tech Bros show results or get money parceled out year by year like the plebes at universities. The report also proposes that we should have “fast grants” with “simplified applications requiring just a few pages of writing” because that is definitely how science works, just writing a bit off the dome and getting some cash. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) [ Tech elites are turning AI into ChatGPTrump ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Paul Waldman · July 29, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Oh, and we should have prizes and challenges, where multiple teams compete. The proposed prizes include incentives like “advance procurement commitments,” which means the federal government agrees to buy whatever is being developed. There’s also “regulatory fast-tracking,” making sure all those great AI thingies don’t have to wait too long to be unleashed on a market. These aren’t incentives to do science. These are incentives to develop things with tax dollars that you can then sell to the government for more tax dollars. In the suggestion that might be the most unhinged, the most very opposite of how both government and research work, our new age will include “golden tickets.” That’s where an individual reviewer in an agency — yes, just one person — can “recommend unconventional proposals that may not pass consensus-driven review panels” because somehow this will “surface valuable ideas too divisive for committees and attract higher quality reviewers by empowering them to exercise independent scientific judgment.” Yes, that’s saying that a random person in an agency should be able to shovel money at some idea even if it can’t pass a review panel, and that the opportunity to do so will attract better employees because apparently all the best minds in science are chomping at the bit to be allowed to unilaterally fund AI research based on their personal vibes. But that isn’t at all how actual science works, and actual scientists aren’t unhappy about review panels. They work collaboratively, not siloed in some secret race to create the next AI chatbot. A 2020 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research examined whether peer review panels succeed in helping agencies predict which research ideas will best advance science. Peer review was better at finding “diamond in the rough” applicants than a single government program official. How about that. Trump always wants a taste It’s painfully clear that what Katsios is trying to do here is turn the whole of government science research and funding into the sort of “move fast and break things” paradigm that is the hallmark of big tech. That method works to line the pockets of tech executives, but it isn’t science. There’s a reason the government funds different kinds of research than private tech companies do. What Katsios either fails to understand or deliberately ignores is that the federal government is the main funder of basic research precisely because it can take a long time for it to bear fruit and is not intended to be profitable as such. “Basic” here does not mean rudimentary or simple, but rather research that is designed to advance scientific knowledge instead of achieving a specific outcome or product. Big tech companies don’t widely fund that sort of research, because it doesn’t make them money. Industry dollars account for only about 20 percent of basic research funding, while the government contributes around 60 percent. Big tech companies and startups do, however, rely on and benefit from that basic research. A 2019 study found that 35 percent of all patents obtained by venture-backed startups from 1976 to 2016 cited federally supported research. Basic research funded by the NIH contributed to every single drug the FDA approved from 2010 to 2016. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) [ The Saudi nuclear farce and governance by whim and meme ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Noah Berlatsky · Jul 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Unlike inventing the next ChatGPT, actual science is slow and iterative. Government funding of research that, on its face, would not appear to lead to any big new invention is actually what underpins those big new inventions. If the government hadn’t funded research into desert lizard venom, we wouldn’t know about semaglutide, and we wouldn’t have Ozempic. If research scientists hadn’t studied how bees optimize nectar foraging within a colony, we wouldn’t have the algorithm that assigns internet traffic across computer servers. The report assiduously ignores that a symbiotic, profitable relationship between the federal government, universities, and private companies already exists. Each federal research dollar generates about $1.50 to $3.00 in long-term economic benefits. The $36 billion the government awarded in NIH research funding in fiscal year 2025 generated $94 billion in new economic activity. Trump’s proposed new golden age is intended to strip those billions from universities, resulting in the dismantling of departments and the shuttering of labs. But Katsios has a plan for that: Universities should just become trade schools to churn out no-show STEM degrees! “Require universities and community colleges to embed practical technical training and externships into STEM curricula. Let hands-on experience and industry credentials count toward degrees.” It’s quite the feat to, on the one hand, strip schools of funding for scientific research while simultaneously demanding to control what is taught and, oh, also, colleges need to give degrees to employees at big tech companies just for being employees at big tech companies. The new golden age would also exacerbate the brain drain Trump’s policies have already caused. Nature found that in the first quarter of 2025, US scientists submitted 32 percent more job applications abroad than in 2024. A March 2025 poll by Nature of roughly 1,600 scientists found that over 1,200 said they were considering leaving the country. Europe is investing $565 million to make it a “magnet for researchers” and provide funding for scientists who relocate. The new golden age is also about embedding Trump’s xenophobia into the fabric of American science. The report complains of an “over-reliance on foreign students” that “creates a security challenge our institutions are ill-equipped to address” and that a “reliance on foreign talent sidelines American students.” This is, to put it mildly, nonsense. International students pay far higher tuition and often receive no financial aid. Their tuition dollars are what make it possible for American students to get financial aid. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Those 1.1 million international students accounted for only six percent of the total number of students in higher education that year, but were such an economic engine that for every three international students, one job was created or supported. It’s impossible not to wonder whether part of Trump’s loathing for universities and their leading role in scientific research is that there is no way for him to corrupt the process and make money off it in the same way he can by giving millions and billions to Silicon Valley types who, in turn, give him millions in cash. There’s no way for his children to invest in universities that the government then gives no-bid contracts to, fattening the family’s bottom line, which is pretty much the Trump sons’ current venture capital practice. Trump and Katsios’s view of science is narrow, cramped, and wrong. We’re not in a crisis, we’re not a failed state. We’ve been a science superpower for decades, and the only thing that threatens that is Donald Trump. Tech bros are already living high off the hog in this administration. They don’t need any more of our tax dollars. Hopefully this new golden age never comes to pass. Thanks for reading Public Notice. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription. 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 Thanks for reading, and for your support.
How a Few Hundred Dollars Could Manipulate Election Prediction Markets
Touted as a truth serum for political forecasting, they’re vulnerable to distortion, sometimes at surprisingly low cost.
Huge 1.5-Million-Year-Old Footprints Suggest a Human Cousin Nicknamed Nutcracker Man Was Far Bigger Than We Thought
The tracks suggest Paranthropus boisei grew surprisingly large and traveled in male groups.
Can Anyone Spare a Buck For Texas?
One of America’s most competitive Senate races features a surprising dynamic: No Republicans are spending money yet.
Madden NFL 27: See the ratings for Titans rookie class
EA Sports released Madden 27 ratings for the Tennessee Titans rookie class, revealing some surprising rankings.
Kaitlan Collins talks 'surprising' Trump correspondents' dinner speech reaction
Kaitlan Collins is not sweating President Donald Trump continuing to insult her.
Experts unveil the one country with the longest lifespan – but there's a surprising catch
Scientists calculated the lifespan of 204 countries and what they found was surprisingly consistent
500,000-year-old elephant bone hammer shows ancient humans were master toolmakers
Early humans in England crafted a rare piece of elephant bone into a reusable hammer for sharpening stone tools nearly 500,000 years ago. The extraordinary find reveals that ancient toolmakers were resourceful, skilled, and capable of surprisingly advanced planning.
Dana White provides update on Conor McGregor after surprising video
Conor McGregor posted a video of him doing leg lifts despite reporting he injured his right knee and Dana White provided an update on the situation.
Cardinals Make Surprising Jacoby Brissett Decision
The Arizona Cardinals have a different quarterback room this year in the post-Kyler Murray era, with Jacoby Brissett now leading the way. The post Cardinals Make Surprising Jacoby Brissett Decision appeared first on HEAVY.
7 Rarely Mentioned JDM Engines With Surprising Power
The 2JZ and RB26 are famous, but the Toyota 7M-GTE and Nissan S20, among others, prove the sheer power and depth of Japanese engineering.
Surprising starting pitcher is emerging as MLB trade deadline target
Recent success has changed how this pitcher is viewed among contending teams.
New York Giants Could Make Surprise RB Move
The New York Giants could make a surprising decision at running back before the start of the NFL season.
Democrats Finally Have a Pick to Take On Susan Collins. It Was a Long, Strange Trip to Get There.
This weekend’s convention is a surprisingly low-key end to a truly wild ride.
Secrets of birdsongs' 'spectacular diversity' revealed
A scientific study has revealed the acoustic secret that connects all birdsong - and it is surprisingly simple
When It Comes to Fusion, Materials Matter
Fusion at high temperatures powers the sun and, if harnessed, could provide a potential source of energy here on Earth. But controlling fusion reactions has other benefits. The process also generates subatomic particles called neutrons that are used in a range of applications spanning medicine, research, and national security. Now, scientists at the University of California, Davis (UC Davis), and the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have found that the materials surrounding a fusion reaction can dramatically increase how often it occurs, particularly at low energies where fusion is rare. The study was published July 18 in Nature Communications. Their approach sets up a way to study and engineer nuclear reactions within solid materials, opening a new field of “materials-driven fusion.” Instead of designing materials just to survive the harsh conditions of fusion, researchers might be able to design materials that boost the reaction in specific conditions, similar to the way catalysts speed up chemical processes. “It gives you a new knob to turn that you didn’t have before,” said Arun Persaud, head of the Fusion Science & Ion Beam Technology group in Berkeley Lab’s Accelerator Technology & Applied Physics (ATAP) Division. “If we understand this effect better, it opens the door to engineering new materials that would affect the fusion rate under certain conditions. Someday future progress might enable more compact and efficient neutron generators, which have all kinds of applications, like cargo screening, planetary science, and medical therapy and imaging.” In the experiment, researchers used two different methods to pack deuterium, a heavy form of hydrogen atoms that is often used in fusion, into thin foils of palladium and titanium. They then fired a beam of deuterium ions at the foils at different energies and measured how often fusion happened. Then they compared the rates from the different materials and methods with the “bare” fusion reaction (not in a material). The team found that fusion rates depended on how the deuterium was loaded into the metal foils. The biggest effect was at the lowest energies, below 2.5 kiloelectronvolts (keV), where theory predicts fusion rates drop off sharply. Instead, researchers found a surprising plateau: Some samples showed elevated fusion rates roughly a quintillion times higher than bare fusion reactions. (A quintillion is a 1 followed by 18 zeroes.) Researchers are not exactly sure why that’s happening, though they have some ideas and ways to test them. The electrons and defects within the material might partially shield repulsive electrostatic forces between deuterium nuclei, making it easier for them to get close together and fuse. Tuning the electronic structure, defects, and composition of materials could help make nuclear reactions happen more readily. “It comes down to better understanding the mechanism so that we can try to enhance it,” said corresponding author Jeremy Munday, a professor at UC Davis. “We’ve seen that we can increase fusion rates, but what is the limit? Can we bring it to lower temperatures or energies? There’s obviously a lot of interest and excitement about fusion, so if there’s something we can learn about the physics at these lower energy scales, maybe there’s something we can translate to other areas of nuclear science.” The team plans to explore a wider range of materials and continue probing the unexpected fusion plateau at lower energies. Their work establishes a reproducible experimental platform to study how solid materials influence nuclear reactions, creating a new area of research that links fusion science with materials science and chemistry. “The work shows conclusively that the material environment where fusion occurs at low temperatures is an active participant rather than a passive container,” said Cameron Geddes, director of ATAP. “That adds a new dimension to fusion research.” This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). ### Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) is committed to groundbreaking research focused on discovery science and solutions for abundant and reliable energy supplies. The lab’s expertise spans materials, chemistry, physics, biology, earth and environmental science, mathematics, and computing. Researchers from around the world rely on the lab’s world-class scientific facilities for their own pioneering research. Founded in 1931 on the belief that the biggest problems are best addressed by teams, Berkeley Lab and its scientists have been recognized with 17 Nobel Prizes. Berkeley Lab is a multiprogram national laboratory managed by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science. DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit energy.gov/science.
Patrick Kane reportedly walks away from Blackhawks over unexpected issue!
A surprising condition may have derailed Kane's emotional return to Chicago.
Cam Newton among ESPN layoffs after ‘First Take’ rise
Given his recent addition to the talent roster at ESPN and quick rise through the ranks at First Take, Cam Newton is one of the most surprising names to be let go in the latest round of layoffs at the company. Newton joins a list that includes NFL analyst Ryan Clark, MLB host and play-by-play man…
China’s Chang’e-6 reveals why solar wind hits the Moon’s two sides differently
China’s Chang’e-6 samples have uncovered a surprising difference between the Moon’s two hemispheres. Solar wind particles penetrated deeper into the far-side soil because Earth’s magnetosphere slows the particles that reach the near side. Noble gases locked inside the lunar regolith preserved evidence of this uneven bombardment. These gases may even help scientists reconstruct the ancient history of Earth’s magnetic shield.
Former Left 4 Dead Writer Pans PlayStation Backlash Over Physical Media
Unsurprisingly, there has been more than a little backlash following Sony's recent decision to end the production of physical games media in 2028. Much of that backlash has been met with questions from skeptics about the real-world success of physical media compared to digital, and even game...
Monkeys are surprisingly good at geometry
They may understand shapes as well as your toddler.
The surprising benefits of red light
Better skin, faster wound healing and reduced vision loss are on the cards
Shaky political "science": breakdown of the peer review process
[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 December 2025, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting (RCV). 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 four articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report; the second one analyzed 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; a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research; and a fourth article that analyzed seven studies sponsored by New America’s political reform program that deployed flawed methodology based on “simulated” elections instead of real-world elections, which when combined with some basic misunderstandings of RCV, produced odd and misleading results]. In this fifth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we examine two flawed studies on the impact of RCV on voter turnout authored by San Francisco State University professor Jason McDaniel. McDaniel’s research in these two papers stands out for its puzzling methodology, inadequate and cherry-picked data, and faulty analyses that not only misunderstands ranked choice voting but reflects a basic misunderstanding of politics in general. The first of the McDaniel studies actually passed through a peer review process and then was subsequently published by the Journal of Urban Affairs, despite its obvious errors. It is perplexing that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the errors and send it back to McDaniel for a rewrite or outright rejection. This calls into question the credibility of the peer review process itself. The peer review process is supposed to represent the intellectual pinnacle of the profession – a way for academics to certify the quality of each other’s work, and to act as a check against sloppy research. In the case of the McDaniel study, the peer review process failed. Yet his flawed study has been cited dozens of times by other political scientists in their own flawed works — an unvirtuous circle of academic research. Here is the first Jason McDaniel study that we analyzed: “Writing the Rules to Rank the Candidates: Examining the Impact of Instant-Runoff Voting on Racial Group Turnout in San Francisco Mayoral Elections,” by Jason McDaniel, 2016, Journal of Urban Affairs. This study covered San Francisco’s use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in mayoral elections, purporting to show that RCV reduces voter turnout overall, increases voter errors, and has a negative impact on “marginal populations,” i.e. racial minorities, mainly as the result of the alleged complexity of RCV asking voters to rank candidates and having to be familiar with multiple candidates and related dynamics. McDaniel reached these conclusions by examining five San Francisco mayoral elections taking place in odd years (i.e. where there are no federal or state races on the ballot) from 1995 to 2011, comparing three earlier non-RCV races (in 1995, 1999 and 2003) with the later two RCV races (in 2007 and 2011). Only two RCV races were studied, and as McDaniel acknowledged, only the contest in 2011 was “competitive” (that contest in 2007 was the first mayoral election using RCV, and incumbent mayor Gavin Newsom won easily in the first round of counting, earning 74% of first choices and far ahead of the second place candidate who had just 6.3% of first choices). Yet even the allegedly competitive contest in 2011was won by an incumbent with a landslide margin of nearly 20 points. No other elections were studied by McDaniel, even though San Francisco elects 17 other offices besides mayor with RCV, including the 11 seats on the Board of Supervisors (the name for the city council) in even years, and six other citywide offices in odd years. Previous academic research has found that competitive elections can stimulate greater voter involvement and higher turnout. For unexplained reasons, this study ignored at least 34 other RCV races between the years 2004 to 2011, many of which were very competitive and had high voter turnout. Instead, McDaniel’s analysis based its conclusions on data from only a single, marginally-competitive mayor’s race using RCV. These 2007 and 2011 mayoral elections were the only two RCV elections that McDaniel used as the sole basis for his small data set to determine the impact of RCV on voter turnout. Despite having no meaningful data to inform his study, McDaniel nonetheless concluded that RCV lowered turnout when compared to the previous three mayoral non-RCV elections using two-round runoffs. Then, using the same inadequate database of San Francisco elections, McDaniel also found that “Instant-runoff voting is associated with a significant decline in Black voter turnout and White voter turnout…On average, Black voter turnout decreases by 18 points and White voter turnout decreases by 16 points …” But how could he credibly arrive at that conclusion when his study was based on voter turnout in two RCV contests that were not even remotely competitive? Beyond that, McDaniel tacitly admits that the key determining factor driving Black voter turnout was not RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable Black candidate. McDaniel wrote, “Black voter turnout was about 17 percentage points higher for the two elections that featured an African American candidate compared to the three elections that did not” — but one of those three elections did not use RCV. The same dynamic was present for White voter turnout, in which higher turnout was not correlated with RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable White candidate. Beyond that, McDaniel’s voter turnout results, whether correlated with the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections, showed no clear patterns. In his Figure 1, he shows low Asian voter turnout in the non-RCV elections in 1999 and 2003 when there was no viable Asian candidate running, but in the 2007 mayoral election using RCV, there is still no viable Asian candidate, yet Asian turnout increases dramatically. For Latinos, voter turnout is virtually the same in 1999 (no viable Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2003 (leading Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2007 (no viable Latino candidate, RCV elections) and 2011 (leading Latino candidate, RCV elections). Meanwhile White voter turnout increased dramatically from a low in the 2007 mayoral election, in which the leading candidate was a white incumbent, to the 2011 election in which there were no leading white candidates that finished any higher than sixth place with 5.6% of the vote. Clearly other factors were determining voter turnout than either the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections. Despite these inconsistent findings, McDaniel boldly marches forth to render conclusions about the impact of RCV on different groups of racial voters, even though his conclusions are not remotely supported by his data. This looks like the worst kind of “data cherry picking” to cover up a puzzling conclusion based on a poor data set involving only two RCV elections, neither of which were remotely competitive. McDaniel’s cherry picking didn’t stop there. In calculating voter turnout for the three non-RCV mayoral elections in 1995, 1999 and 2003, he failed to mention that in each of these years there was a two-round runoff election, with a first round election in November in which no candidate garnered a winning majority of the vote, followed by the decisive runoff in December. So there were two non-RCV elections in each election year. But McDaniel only decided to include one of the two elections in his data set, apparently the December runoff in each year (which had higher turnout in two out of the three mayor’s races, and lower turnout in the third). So he ignored the November 1995 election, the November 1999 election when turnout was only 45 percent, and the November 2003 election when turnout was only 45.7 percent. This is flawed methodology based on blatant cherry picking, since McDaniel simply omitted three elections worth of data that did not fit within his frame. His study should never have made it through a peer review process, and it is an embarrassment to political science that not only was it approved for publication, but it has been uncritically cited by dozens of other political scientists. Share A “study” without wider context or credible data Lacking a data set that included even a single competitive RCV mayoral race, McDaniel declared that RCV lowered voter turnout in 2011, when turnout was 42.5 percent. But he also ignored -- or did not realize -- that voter turnout in mayoral elections during 2011 had sharply declined in all big cities, including far more steeply in nearby Los Angeles and other cities. In fact, San Francisco’s election in 2011 had the second highest turnout of any mayoral election in the nation’s 22 largest cities from 2008-2011. Was 2011 just a particularly low turnout year all across the country, perhaps because the country was still reeling from the aftermath of the housing market collapse in 2008-2010? McDaniel ignored this factor and did not search for alternative explanations beyond his flawed thesis. Furthermore, while McDaniel suggested that RCV leads to more “overvotes” – which is an invalidated ballot in which a voter, in either a non-RCV or RCV race, makes a mistake and selects two candidates for a single choice – he failed to address that in the June 2012 US Senate primary contest, which used the typical “one-choice” plurality method and did not use RCV, there was more than five times as many overvotes in San Francisco and Oakland than in the RCV mayoral elections in those cities. Additionally, turnout had been significantly higher and more representative in RCV elections for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors races -- that McDaniel didn’t even bother to study -- as compared to previous “delayed two-round runoffs” for those offices, often higher by as much as 40% in the RCV races. Perhaps the most surprising irony was that an earlier study co-authored by McDaniel (Overvoting and the Equality of Voice under Instant-Runoff Voting in San Francisco by Francis Neely and Jason McDaniel, 2015, California Journal of Politics and Policy) found that overvotes are often more common in lower-income precincts, but that the pattern of overvoting is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. Wrote Neely and McDaniel: “[Overvote] errors appear to be a function of complexity in general and not IRV per se…. the pattern of overvoting is similar in both IRV and non-IRV contests…Even among votes cast in a top-of-the-ticket race like U.S. Senate, overvoting occurs in an uneven fashion” (IRV, or ‘instant runoff voting,’ is another name for ranked choice voting in single-winner contests). So McDaniel not only contradicted his own conclusion in his earlier study with Neely, but the earlier study had been an important corrective for one of the most frequently made mistakes made by anti-RCV political scientists – a continual failure to provide crucial context by pairing a comparative analysis of real world RCV elections with an analysis of real world plurality or other electoral methods. Unfortunately McDaniel’s earlier study does not get cited much by other researchers, and McDaniel did not even cite it in his own flawed study analyzed above. Incredibly, McDaniel cherrypicked McDaniel, even as his flawed study has been cited dozens of times. Despite being a textbook example of poor political “science,” featuring both inadequate as well as cherrypicked data, the shelf life of McDaniel’s study has been extended endlessly by other political scientists and media outlets who have cited it uncritically. Equally troubling, the Journal of Urban Affairs put this paper through its peer review process and published it despite its numerous flaws. McDaniel gets it wrong, Part II Not content with producing one shoddy, confused paper, McDaniel produced another one a few years later, here is the link: Electoral Rules and Voter Turnout in Mayoral Elections: An Analysis of Ranked-Choice Voting by Jason McDaniel. San Francisco State Univ. (McDaniel, 2019). In this paper, McDaniel extended his previous flawed research focused on San Francisco, about voter turnout and voter impact, to multiple RCV cities through the 2018 elections. In his data set he included San Francisco, Minneapolis, St Paul, Oakland, Berkeley, San Leandro and Santa Fe. He then compared their turnout in mayoral elections to non-RCV cities, and to mayoral elections in those cities held before first RCV usage, and concluded “a significant decrease in voter turnout of approximately 3–5 percentage points in RCV cities after the implementation of RCV.” But he replicated many of the same mistakes as his first study presented above. While in this study McDaniel attempted to distinguish between various factors, such as odd year vs. even year elections, competitive races vs. noncompetitive, contests with open seats and other factors, the analysis is superficial and inadequate. He attempts to incorporate so many often-conflicting variables that his conclusions are once again unsupported by the actual data, and ultimately unconvincing (this second study never underwent a peer review process). For example, McDaniel declared that for RCV cities “in elections that are more competitive than average (margin of victory less than 20%), there is no significant RCV effect on voter turnout.” Yet McDaniel is a professor in a city, San Francisco, in which the 2018 special election using RCV to fill a mayoral vacancy was exceedingly close, decided by a margin of only one percentage point, and resulted in the second highest turnout in San Francisco history for a mayoral election. Illustrating the complexity involved in assessing the critical factors in turnout, that special election was held on the same election day as federal and state offices, which tends to boost turnout. Yet more voters participated in that RCV mayoral election than voted on the same day in the non-RCV primary for governor in which former San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom was running. Even more puzzling, in this study McDaniel inaccurately cited his own previous study from 2015 with Neely. McDaniel wrote, “Neely and McDaniel (2015) examine individual ballot image files within a natural experiment, and find higher rates of ballot errors in RCV elections compared to non-RCV elections” (emphasis added). However, we quoted from that 2015 study several paragraphs above, and in actual fact Neely and McDaniel actually concluded the opposite -- that the pattern of overvoting – which is the most common form of ballot error – is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. McDaniel also ignored the fact that in Bay Area RCV elections held in even years – at the same time as federal and state elections, when turnout is highest -- the “undervote” (that is, the dropoff in ballots cast for governor or mayor) has declined, which contradicts his thesis that the act of ranking ballots in RCV elections is too complex and presents a barrier for certain demographics of voters. To his credit, McDaniel actually acknowledged another contradiction in his own paper, which found a negative RCV turnout effect in some odd-year elections but not others, admitting that “may present a challenge to the theory that increased complexity [from RCV] will have a marginal negative effect on voter turnout.” But he tried to wallpaper over that contradiction by blaming it on an unlikely source -- bad election administration. McDaniels wrote, “This would suggest that the negative impact of RCV on voter participation may be alleviated by high quality election administration,” without presenting any data or even anecdotes to support such an unfounded theory. While competent election administration of any election, whether RCV or non-RCV, is crucially important, there is no credible research that supports the far-fetched notion that the quality of election administration has much of an impact on voter turnout in US elections, whether using RCV or otherwise. Upgrade to a $5 subscription The unvirtuous circle of academic research It is puzzling how McDaniel’s first study could have survived the peer review process for the Journal of Urban Affairs. The mistakes in McDaniel’s first study above should have been obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of ranked choice voting as well as elections in general, and elections in San Francisco specifically. It undermines faith in the credibility of the peer review process to think that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the egregious errors and reject McDaniel’s sloppy research and paper. And it remains a black mark on political science that this thoroughly discredited study has been cited dozens of times by other researchers. Indeed, in our research paper it became apparent that many political scientists cite each other’s flawed research to pad their list of citations and to legitimize their own flawed research, creating an unvirtuous circle of political science. More broadly, McDaniel’s voter turnout studies, like other studies evaluating RCV’s impact on turnout, lacked a recognition that no credible opinion or research can claim that RCV increases voter turnout merely because so many voters are excited to vote for their favorite candidates instead of “lesser evil” candidates without worrying about spoilers. Instead, with respect to turnout, the advantage of RCV has always been that, in most places where it has been used, it has eliminated a pre-November primary or post-November runoff, which usually saw about half the turnout of the November general election. This is especially true during even years when there are state and federal elections on the ballot which substantially drive turnout more than local contests. Any study that does not adequately account for this non-November primary/runoff vs November general election dynamic, or odd year vs even year election factors, is simply not credible. Both of McDaniel’s studies largely failed on those grounds. Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to a $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS…your digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe
Colorado Republicans will have to live with the consequences of their candidate of choice
Two surprising election results this year in Colorado and Maine’s 2026 primaries compel us to examine the role of voters. It’s usually regarded as impolite, if not insulting, to question the judgment of voters. Democratic theory often implies the collective conclusions they reach capture some ephemeral element of shared wisdom. This may be true when […]
Water First, Coffee in Moderation: What to Drink for Better Cognitive Health
The single best beverage for cognitive health is surprisingly simple: water. While coffee has attracted growing scientific interest for its potential brain benefits, hydration remains the foundation of healthy brain function.
What scientists felt when approaching Egyptian mummies will truly shock you - Futura-Sciences
The Surprising Role of Scents in Ancient Egyptian Burial Rites In ancient Egypt, smell was far from a trivial detail: it was a crucial part of funerary rituals. Pleasant fragrances were linked to the gods and purity, while foul odors were a direct reminder of decay and death. For Egyptians,...
Citizen Scientists Helped Decipher How Harvestmen Became Oddly Devoted Dads
Paternal care is vanishingly rare in the animal kingdom, yet one spider relative pulls it off repeatedly across thousands of species. Unlocking why required a surprising shortcut that compressed decad...
Perspective: Abandoning business
For businesses in our industry and similar sectors, the recent primary results were an alarming wake-up call that many read as “get out of Dodge, now.” To say that the results in both the Democratic and Republican primaries were surprising and disturbing to many in the business community would be an understatement. On the Republican […]
Perspective: Abandoning business
For businesses in our industry and similar sectors, the recent primary results were an alarming wake-up call that many read as “get out of Dodge, now.” To say that the results in both the Democratic and Republican primaries were surprising and disturbing to many in the business community would be an understatement. On the Republican […]
Coffee may help the body fight stress and aging through a hidden cellular switch
Scientists may have uncovered one reason coffee is repeatedly associated with healthier aging and lower disease risk. Compounds in coffee appear to activate NR4A1, a receptor that helps protect cells from stress, inflammation, and damage. These protective effects disappeared when the receptor was removed, strengthening the connection. Surprisingly, plant-based compounds such as caffeic acid seemed far more active than caffeine itself.
Coffee may help the body fight stress and aging through a hidden cellular switch
Scientists may have uncovered one reason coffee is repeatedly associated with healthier aging and lower disease risk. Compounds in coffee appear to activate NR4A1, a receptor that helps protect cells from stress, inflammation, and damage. These protective effects disappeared when the receptor was removed, strengthening the connection. Surprisingly, plant-based compounds such as caffeic acid seemed far more active than caffeine itself.
5 Classic PS1 Games That Are Unplayable Today
Surprisingly, these five classic games for PS1 are not only no longer playable, but include some of the platform's biggest and most acclaimed titles.
Beware the unintended consequences of testosterone screening for military servicemembers
“I fear that the widespread rollout of testosterone screening may lead to some surprising and unintended consequences,” writes a urologist who studies testosterone.
Where Was ‘The Odyssey’ Filmed? All About the Surprising Destinations Featured in Christopher Nolan’s Movie
Christopher Nolan’s ‘The Odyssey’ was shot across five European countries. Here’s everything to know about where ‘The Odyssey’ movie was filmed.
Tom Cruise Reveals Surprising New Look In Trailer For Movie About An Eccentric Billionaire
Check out the movie star’s wild new role in the upcoming black comedy starring Jesse Plemons and Riz Ahmed.
Steelers linked to surprising trade for former second-round pick
The Pittsburgh Steelers have been linked this offseason to a surprising trade for Jacksonville Jaguars offensive tackle Walker Little.
Nix’s Numbers Stack Up Well Against Rest Of AFC West
Denver Broncos quarterback Bo Nix does surprisingly well when you compare his numbers to the rest of the division.
Did this scientist solve humanity’s biggest mystery? The surprising theory explained - Futura-Sciences
From behind the Iron Curtain Gánti was born in Vác, Hungary, on September 10, 1933. He grew up during World War II and the subsequent Soviet occupation. Though he trained as a chemical engineer and worked in industrial biochemistry, his lifelong obsession was a fundamental question: what actually defines something...
2026 Open Championship odds, picks, date: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the British Open 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets and picks for Royal Birkdale
The science of Alaska’s bees: What researchers are learning
For decades, scientists knew surprisingly little about Alaska’s native bees. Now, Alaskans working together to understand the bees that pollinate the North.
LeBron James Teases Warriors Move With Surprising Golf Outing
LeBron James golfed with Draymond Green and Kevin Hart, sparking fresh rumors about a potential Warriors return before his free agency decision.
Older adults who followed popular diet saw surprising mental health benefit
Eating the Mediterranean diet, which is rich in fruits, vegetables, fish and olive oil, may help keep the mind strong even into old age, according to new research.
Scientists Found Gold in the Most Ironic Place Possible
Geologists found what they call “invisible gold” hidden within a surprising mineral near undersea hydrothermal vents.
2026 Open Championship odds, picks, date: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the British Open 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets and picks for Royal Birkdale
2026 Open Championship odds, picks, date: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the British Open 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets for Royal Birkdale
These Angels Prospects Have ‘Graduated’ To Provide Results
The Los Angeles Angels have gotten surprising results from these former prospects.
2026 Open Championship odds, picks, date: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the British Open 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets for Royal Birkdale
Satya Nadella has issued a shocking warning to companies using AI
In a surprising blog post on Monday, Microsoft CEO is warning enterprises of the dangers of using proprietary models like Anthropic's and OpenAI's.
Lakers’ Surprising Jarred Vanderbilt Stance Amid Jonathan Kuminga Pursuit Revealed
Understanding the Jarred Vanderbilt Lakers stance is crucial as the team navigates trade discussions for Jonathan Kuminga this summer. The post Lakers’ Surprising Jarred Vanderbilt Stance Amid Jonathan Kuminga Pursuit Revealed appeared first on HEAVY.
2026 Open Championship odds, picks, date: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the British Open 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets for Royal Birkdale
Arri Surprisingly Sells its Global Rental Business
Arri says selling Arri Rental will help sharpen its focus.
New dark matter theory could solve multiple cosmic mysteries at once
Dark matter may be far more complicated than scientists once believed. A new study suggests it could consist of at least two different kinds of particles that slowly separate over time, with heavier particles sinking toward the centers of galaxies and lighter ones drifting outward. This simple idea could explain several puzzling cosmic observations that have frustrated astronomers for years, from unusually diffuse dwarf galaxies to surprisingly dense dark matter clumps that bend light through gravitational lensing.
A 200-year-old physics experiment could help build future computers
Scientists at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore have discovered a surprisingly simple way to create exotic light structures called optical skyrmions using a 200-year-old optical effect known as the Poisson spot. Instead of relying on expensive, highly engineered materials, they simply shine a laser at a tiny circular disc, producing stable swirling patterns in light that researchers believe could one day help power advanced data storage, communications, and computing technologies.
The surprising health benefits of eating spicy food
Like it hot? Your heart, gut — and even your lifespan — may benefit.
The surprising science behind fireworks...and Florida
Every Fourth of July, fireworks fill the night sky with brilliant colors. But behind every red, blue, green, and white burst is a little chemistry—and a surprising connection to naturally occurring minerals, including one mined right here in Florida.
When regulation is good for business
By now, I think I have established both my view that I am a fan of ESG investing and the benefits of regulating what is and isn’t a sustainable investment, and my view that in Europe, ESG regulation has gone too far and become too costly. It almost feels like the old Aristotelian maxim of doing things in moderation that leads to the best outcomes is valid in regulatory efforts as well. To give you an example, let’s look at a study by the National Bank of Belgium on the impact of the EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) on fund flows of conventional and ESG funds. The SFDR was announced on 27 November 2019 and came into effect on 10 March 2021. It was implemented in several stages and split funds marketed in the EU into three broad categories: (i) Art. 6 funds that are basically conventional funds without any specific ESG integration, (ii) Art. 8 funds that ‘promote environmental or social characteristics’, which must provide additional reporting how they do that, and (iii) Art. 9 funds that are impact funds. The gaps between the announcement and the phased implementation give us an idea of how fund flows were affected by the regulation. It is clearly visible in the figure below that once the new regulation was announced and when it was initially implemented, fund flows in Art. 8 and Art. 9 funds increased significantly. Conventional Art. 6 funds also saw more inflows, but the increase was not statistically significant. I should add that the data below is pure fund flow, cleaned of performance effects and of any reclassified funds that moved from one classification to another. Note also that once the initial rush in ESG funds was over, additional, stricter regulatory requirements didn’t create that many new flows. This implies that with additional regulation, the funds incurred higher costs to comply but didn’t benefit in terms of new inflows and higher assets under management. Fund flows as the SFDR regulation was implemented in the EU Source: Emiris et al. (2026) When examining the drivers of these flows, the authors of the study found that institutional investors were more likely to switch to ESG funds and particularly so in countries where concerns about sustainability are culturally more accepted. In a society where buy-in into environmental and social risks is higher, private investors were shifting more of their assets into ESG funds as the regulation made it clear which funds are really green and which ones are not. And institutional investors in these countries did so as well, given the societal pressures and reputational risks of sticking with conventional funds. Meanwhile, fund managers reacted to the changing regulatory environment as well. Many funds that were mildly green before the regulation was announced became greener and more sustainable as the regulation was introduced to attract new assets and new investors. Cleverly, and unsurprisingly, these ESG funds also charge on average higher fees, which means that not only did fund managers gather fresh assets, but their profitability increased as well.
Where you live could shape your dementia risk, massive study finds
Researchers analyzing data from more than 214,000 people found that dementia risk factors differ widely across countries, challenging the idea of a one-size-fits-all prevention strategy. At the same time, they uncovered surprisingly consistent patterns that could help shape smarter, more targeted public health efforts.
"God, the Science, the Evidence" for believers and atheists
Arguments for the existence of God come from science, philosophy, history and more. The book has been a surprising success and is now updated in English.
Packers make surprising contract extension decision despite defensive coordinator change
Off-ball linebacker Isaiah McDuffie reached a new one-year deal, and now he's under contract with Green Bay through 2027.
Spider-like creatures help uncover the surprising origins of fatherhood
Citizen scientists have helped researchers solve a long-standing mystery about how parental care evolved in harvestmen. Using photos and observations from iNaturalist, scientists more than doubled the known cases of egg-guarding behavior and discovered that maternal and paternal care followed different evolutionary paths. The project, completed in just days with help from public data, shows how citizen science is transforming biological research on a global scale.
Alzheimer's tau protein has a surprising secret role in memory
Researchers found that tau is essential for turning new experiences into lasting memories by helping organize the brain's memory-storing cells. The mouse study also revealed how abnormal tau may contribute to Alzheimer's by disrupting both the formation of new memories and the recall of existing ones.
Surprising things about flying first class on Japan Airlines; review
I was surprising by how well Japan Airlines' famous 13-year-old cabin has held up, and the Japanese cuisine, which came with caviar, was delicious.
The surprising science behind the “dog days” of summer
It’s July and the air feels like a sauna. If you’ve ever said, “It’s the dog days of summer,” you’re not alone. But have you ever wondered where that phrase actually comes from? H…
Warriors Get Discouraging LeBron Update From NBA Insider
The Warriors got a discouraging LeBron James update after a respected NBA insider revealed a surprising new twist. The post Warriors Get Discouraging LeBron Update From NBA Insider appeared first on HEAVY.
Columbia scientists discover surprising link between serotonin and heart valve disease
Scientists have uncovered evidence that serotonin, the chemical best known for regulating mood, may also speed the progression of a common heart valve disease in some people. The research suggests that patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation who take SSRI antidepressants and carry a specific genetic variant may develop severe valve damage sooner, potentially requiring surgery at a younger age.
A wave of young Miami Cubans disagrees with abuela about politics in the Trump era
As Donald Trump touts his Miami support, a surprisingly large number of younger Cubans and Cuban Americans recoil at the Trump administration’s tactics.
Vikings Get Surprising Quarterback Proposal Out of Nowhere
The Minnesota Vikings and head coach Kevin O’Connell will be entering training camp with a quarterback battle on their hands.As of right now, the overwhelming expectation is that Kyler Murray will end up being the Week 1 starter. However, Murray will face competition from both J.J. McCarthy and Carson Wentz.Murray and McCarthy are the clear […] The post Vikings Get Surprising Quarterback Proposal Out of Nowhere appeared first on HEAVY.
Browns QB Deshaun Watson Has Surprising Edge Over Shedeur Sanders
Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson has a surprising edge over Shedeur Sanders. The post Browns QB Deshaun Watson Has Surprising Edge Over Shedeur Sanders appeared first on HEAVY.
Second pregnancy changes the brain in surprising new ways
Researchers found that every pregnancy rewires the brain in its own way, with a second pregnancy bringing a different pattern of changes than the first. The discoveries could lead to better ways to recognize and treat maternal mental health challenges, including peripartum depression.
The Power of Personal: The Surprising Business Strategy That Won Over Taylor Swift and Kenny Chesney
As concert promotion became increasingly corporate, Louis Messina built a different kind of company—one rooted in personal relationships, artist autonomy, and long-term trust.
World Snake Day: The Surprising Science of Snakes
In honor of World Snake Day, learn about some of nature’s most important—yet misunderstood—animals.
Surprising Mental Health Effects of GLP-1 Weight Loss Drugs
GLP-1 medications may be used to treat select psychiatric disorders.
A vitamin A discovery is changing what scientists know about vision
A surprising discovery is reshaping scientists' understanding of how humans develop sharp central vision before birth. Instead of blue cone cells migrating away from the retina's center, the study found they transform into red and green cones under the influence of vitamin A-related signals and thyroid hormones. The findings could improve lab-grown retinal tissue and lay the groundwork for future cell therapies to restore vision lost to age-related eye diseases.
Oilers' latest free agent target has fans furious
A surprising veteran name has emerged as Edmonton searches for another top-six winger.
AI tools meant to vet science are surprisingly easy to fool
The gold standard of scientific review, peer review by researchers’ colleagues, is in crisis. AI might offer a solution but has problems of its own.
Weibo leaker says iPhone 18 Pro thickness will be ‘surprising’
Days after materials from Apple supplier Tata surfaced online, prominent Weibo leaker “Fixed Focus Digital” doubled down on his earlier claim that the iPhone 18 Pro will be thicker than the iPhone 17 Pro.
Schrödinger’s anthill: Quantum entanglement found in a crystal large enough to hold
A centimeter-sized crystal has revealed clear signs of quantum entanglement, showing that large, everyday objects can display surprisingly deep quantum behavior. The discovery could help solve the mystery of strange metals while opening new possibilities for ultra-precise quantum sensors and other advanced technologies.
Porsche 911 GT3 S/C review: a 9,000rpm nat-asp flat-six and no roof… Reviews 2026
Porsche’s GT department has finally made a proper cabrio, and unsurprisingly it’s really rather special
125-million-year-old 'pregnant' fossil displays alien like reproduction method which has intrigued scientists
Moms are capable of magic that is more than just maternal. Nature has imbued its most special being with surprisingly strange ways of reproduction and care for their babies.
Surprising All-Star Game roster snubs, no chance for a perfect game and things are going off the rails for the Yankees
Surprising things about my 52-hour Amtrak train ride in a roomette
From dinner reservations to motion sickness, here are the most surprising parts of traveling on Amtrak's California Zephyr train for over two days.
Discover Horseshoe Crabs: A Free Five-Day Elementary Science Unit Plan
Horseshoe crabs have roamed Earth's oceans for hundreds of millions of years, and their secrets go far deeper than a prehistoric shell. This free five-day elementary unit uncovers the surprising adapt...
Analyst Names Jaguars’ ‘Most Promising Building Block’
Despite Trevor Lawrence's MVP-caliber rise, a surprising two-way star emerges as Jacksonville’s ultimate cornerstone. Discover why this versatile playmaker holds the key to the franchise's long-term dominance.
Scientists build living ‘neurobots’ that grow their own neural networks
Self-powered, entirely biological constructs injected with neural precursor cells - reveal the surprising flexibility of nervous systems.
Padres Unsurprisingly Place Key Reliever In All-Star Game
The San Diego Padres will only have one player in the All-Star game, and it's closer Mason Miller.
Why a Surprising New Travel Trend Is Fueling a Massive Small Business Boom Across the U.S.
As the price of airline tickets continues to spike, Americans are turning to another form of transportation.
Streetlights are trapping thousands of pill bugs in giant “death spirals”
Researchers discovered that artificial streetlights can trap thousands of woodlice in mesmerizing circular "death spirals" never before seen in the wild. The surprising finding suggests that light pollution may be unintentionally altering the behavior of even the smallest ground-dwelling animals.
Why are Republicans red and Democrats blue?
The party colors are a surprisingly recent tradition. But do they really represent the diversity of Americans’ beliefs?
Carson Cooper Turns Heads with Outstanding NBA Summer League Debut
The former Spartan standout stole the spotlight in Memphis, flashing explosive athleticism and a surprising perimeter game to prove his versatile skill set belongs on the professional stage.
Sony's Marvel Tokon Blocked In Over 100 Countries On Steam
Unsurprisingly, these are the same 132 countries that were originally blocked from purchasing Helldivers 2 on Steam