SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " happen " 2,375 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Some dementia patients grow lucid near the end. Scientists hope it’s a clue.
Accounts raise tantalizing questions about what happens inside a brain afflicted by dementia and whether cognitive abilities could possibly be restored.
Open AI attacked Australia’s health system – and then doubled down on its negligence. The time for ‘wait and see’ is over
Human hackers face serious consequences, and so must AI companies. There is no excuse for what happened
This weekend: The Phantom of the Opera, Dinosaurs in the Desert, FoodieLand, and more!
The weekend is here! Check out these fun events happening around the Valley from September 25 through the 27.
What your overnight blood pressure can reveal about your health
Most people's blood pressure falls by 10% to 20% while they sleep, giving the heart and blood vessels a chance to recover. But for some people, that nighttime dip never happens. Known as "non-dippers," ...
Ohio State welcomes business leaders to campus to strengthen relationships
The Ohio State University is committed to working with the statewide business community on workforce development and advancing innovation and development, President Ravi V. Bellamkonda said during a recent meeting of the Columbus Partnership.“We have some bold things happening,” he said. “We are reimagining business education. We’re reim...
This Overlooked Infrastructure Problem Can Break a Growing Business. Here's How to Prevent It.
Here's what happens when growth outpaces the systems built to support it.
Real-time data provides nuanced look at likelihood of cannabis use
Substance use, including cannabis, is not one-size-fits-all. Some people might consume more in the company of others or in certain situations or locations. Research from the Arizona State University Department of Psychology examines these nuances by leveraging the smartphone most of us carry. This work relies on sending surveys, called ecological momentary assessments, or EMAs, that prompt people to report where they are, what they are doing and what is happening in that moment.
Starfield 2 will likely never happen because the first wasn’t ‘anywhere near successful enough’, former dev says
A sequel could have been much closer to the original vision…
Arts and entertainment events happening September 24th-27th across the Mid-Ohio Valley
Kelsi Ullom joins Daybreak to discuss what’s happening September 24th-27th across the Mid-Ohio Valley!
CJ Bailey discusses aftermath of Vanderbilt game
CJ Bailey met with the media yesterday, the first time he’d spoken with reporters since The Thing That Happened. There is no way to explain any part of what went down during The Thing That Happened, of course, but he did the best he could. Sometimes the football is snapped and major regret ensues. In […]
'What happened on Saturday will not happen to us again'
Rachel: Arsenal seemed to start the season with intent and they delighted us with their slick passing game. Richard: We've handed out and been given one tonking (Coventry and Brighton, respectively). A good start overall but the Brighton game showed what can and will happen if we're not at the races.
Autonomous AI hacks raise thorny questions of legal accountability
The Justice Department has a long history of investigating and prosecuting hackers who break into a private company’s network. But what happens when the hackers aren’t human? That’s the question
How Latinos became America’s biggest swing vote
Donald Trump’s 2024 gains are being erased in the midterms. Here’s what happened.
What to know about Trump’s meeting with China’s Xi and the economic stakes
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the U.S. and China have agreed to extend a trade truce. Here’s a guide to what else is happening behind the scenes.
Tucker Carlson has a new enemy: the politics he helped build
Tucker Carlson is talking about what happened behind closed doors in his very public break with President Trump over the war with Iran.He recounts an Oval Office meeting, before the conflict began, when Carlson says he warned Trump that he was allowing the U.S. to be led to war by Israel. “Yes, you’re right,” Carlson claims Trump admitted. “But in the end we all die anyway, so it doesn’t matter.” "And I was shocked by that, because it's nihilism,” he says. “That's the last thing any leader should display.”In response to a request for comment from NPR, the White House did not address that point specifically, instead sending along a social media post by the president that describes Carlson and others as “stupid people” who want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.In this episode of NPR’s Newsmakers, Carlson and host Steve Inskeep unpack the conservative commentator’s split with Trump and the MAGA movement. They also get into faith, money, political power, and why Carlson believes both major parties have failed Americans.Newsmakers is where you'll find NPR's biggest interviews. We post new episodes as soon as they're available -- any day of the week. Follow or subscribe on Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you watch or listen to podcasts to get new episodes as soon as possible. You can also find Newsmakers on the NPR app. Newsmakers relies on supporters who value independent journalism and a free press. Join NPR+ today to support our work and get perks from the podcasts you trust. Go to plus.npr.org.
Measles almost killed me. Now I’m a doctor — and I'm scared of what's happening
Jewel Mullen was in kindergarten in 1961 when she almost died from measles. Now a physician, measles’ return frightens her.
In rural Pa., doctors confront the hidden health impacts of environmental disasters
This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. In February 2023, George Garrow jumped in his car and hurried to help people impacted by a freight train that had derailed in East Palestine, Ohio. The crash happened about a quarter-mile west of the […]
Three takeaways from Nebraska volleyball’s sweep against Missouri
Nebraska volleyball took on Missouri Wednesday night in a makeup game after the Wrigley Field court disaster that happened on Wednesday, Sept. 6. The two teams were set to play in the inaugural Big Ten/SEC Challenge. Unfortunately, the contest was cancelled early in the first set due to moisture on the court. At the time of cancellation, the Huskers led 11-7.
In Payton vs. MacDonald, Comments Were Sort Of Off-Record
Denver Broncos coach Sean Payton is in a news story about something that happened in 2024.
Health Care Partnership outlines workforce progress
More local nursing graduates are staying in the region, according to officials offering an update on the progress of the New Hanover Healthcare Career Partnership at a public forum last night. According to Jack Watson, dean of UNCW’s College of Health & Human Services, the number of UNCW nursing graduates choosing to remain in the area after graduation has climbed from 27% to the mid-40% range. The New Hanover Healthcare Career Partnership aims to address the region’s healthcare worker shortage, with a key focus on nursing through strategic partnerships between UNCW, Cape Fear Community College (CFCC), New Hanover County Schools and the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce Foundation. "Each of the partners had pathway programs,” said Watson, “but they were almost at times done in a silo." One of the New Hanover Community Endowment's largest commitments to date, the collaborative received a $22.3 million grant in 2023, to be disbursed over three years, beginning in 2024. At the public forum, leadership addressed the nursing bottleneck created by the pandemic, and Laurie Whalin, president of the Novant Health Coastal Region, acknowledged that Novant Health had relied heavily on travel nurses during that period, with travel nurses making up about 47% of staff and nursing turnover at 35% at the height of the pandemic. "I can say we are in a tremendously different place today,” Whalin said at the forum. The number of travel nurses employed by the Novant Health Coastal Region has dropped to around 100 today, which Whalin says accounts for less than 4% of the workforce. Roughly two years into the grant term, major stakeholders in the collaboration pointed to various accomplishments tied to the initiative. According to Stephen Hill, vice president of talent development with the Greater Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, 250 more nurses live in New Hanover County in 2026 than in 2023. Whalin added that between 2021 and 2025, the Novant Health Coastal Region has hired close to 1,200 registered nurses. Additionally, according to Whalin, over the past two years, hiring and retention of nursing graduates from UNCW increased by 103%, while hiring and retention of nursing graduates from CFCC increased by 70%. Mandy Mills, director of career & technical education at New Hanover County Schools, pointed to the launch of its first Health Sciences Academy program, established across the county's four traditional high schools (Hoggard High School, Laney High School, Ashley High School and New Hanover High School), which started with 38 students last year. Mills also pointed to growth in the district’s Nursing Fundamentals course, which grew from 10 seats in 2023 to 50 in 2025-2026 and is now offered at all four traditional high schools. Watson emphasized the growing nursing class sizes and offered an update on the school’s accelerated nursing degree, which launched last year. Eleven students graduated in the first class, and all passed their boards on the first try, Watson said. This year’s class has 24 students. When the endowment announced its $22.3 million grant for the collaborative in 2023, UNCW and CFCC were each slated to receive the bulk of the funds, at about $10 million each. UNCW’s plans for the grant money included expanding its simulation lab, Watson said. He added that construction is expected to begin on the simulation lab this year and will likely extend through next year. According to Mary Ellen Naylor, dean of Health & Human Services at CFCC, the college has experienced growth in its associate degree nursing retention, rising from 59% in 2023 to 76% for the May 2026 class. CFCC used part of its endowment funding to support wraparound services, including a housing stipend, tuition assistance, exam assistance, emergency assistance, drop-in daycare and clinical and educational supplies. "We have very strong … students, but once they get into the program, there are competing priorities,” Naylor said. “They are working multiple jobs. They have children. They're single parents." According to Naylor, in 2026, 94% of students who used support services are still enrolled or have graduated. Addressing a question from an audience member about an approaching “enrollment cliff,” driven largely by dropping birth rates, Watson and Naylor said demand remains strong at both schools. “Right now … we do have more applicants than we have spots in our nursing program, and it is still a competitive process to get into,” Watson said. “I do not foresee that changing.” "(We've) doubled enrollment in our nursing programs over the last few years, but just as Dean Watson said, we still have very robust applicant pools, so it is still very competitive to get in,” Naylor said. "We have the applicant pool to support that, but again, it's not as easy as just saying, 'Okay … we're going to take another 90 students.' It's making sure all the resources and infrastructure that we need to educate the students outside the classroom is there as well." In response to a question about applying the collaborative model to other healthcare positions besides nursing, Sophie Dagenais, CEO and president of the endowment, said she sees the potential for the model to expand to other healthcare jobs and even other industries, but that the endowment hopes to learn from this model first. “This is a grant that is in year two of three years, and first we wanted to learn what is this going to demonstrate, what will we learn and then how may we scale it possibly,” she said. According to endowment spokesperson Amber Rogerson, funds for the program are set to expire after June 2027. “It's too early to discuss what happens after that,” wrote Rogerson in an email, “though we know the partners are considering the future, and some of the work supported by the grants is now built into their regular operations.”
Health Care Partnership outlines workforce progress
More local nursing graduates are staying in the region, according to officials offering an update on the progress of the New Hanover Healthcare Career Partnership at a public forum last night. According to Jack Watson, dean of UNCW’s College of Health & Human Services, the number of UNCW nursing graduates choosing to remain in the area after graduation has climbed from 27% to the mid-40% range. The New Hanover Healthcare Career Partnership aims to address the region’s healthcare worker shortage, with a key focus on nursing through strategic partnerships between UNCW, Cape Fear Community College (CFCC), New Hanover County Schools and the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce Foundation. "Each of the partners had pathway programs,” said Watson, “but they were almost at times done in a silo." One of the New Hanover Community Endowment's largest commitments to date, the collaborative received a $22.3 million grant in 2023, to be disbursed over three years, beginning in 2024. At the public forum, leadership addressed the nursing bottleneck created by the pandemic, and Laurie Whalin, president of the Novant Health Coastal Region, acknowledged that Novant Health had relied heavily on travel nurses during that period, with travel nurses making up about 47% of staff and nursing turnover at 35% at the height of the pandemic. "I can say we are in a tremendously different place today,” Whalin said at the forum. The number of travel nurses employed by the Novant Health Coastal Region has dropped to around 100 today, which Whalin says accounts for less than 4% of the workforce. Roughly two years into the grant term, major stakeholders in the collaboration pointed to various accomplishments tied to the initiative. According to Stephen Hill, vice president of talent development with the Greater Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, 250 more nurses live in New Hanover County in 2026 than in 2023. Whalin added that between 2021 and 2025, the Novant Health Coastal Region has hired close to 1,200 registered nurses. Additionally, according to Whalin, over the past two years, hiring and retention of nursing graduates from UNCW increased by 103%, while hiring and retention of nursing graduates from CFCC increased by 70%. Mandy Mills, director of career & technical education at New Hanover County Schools, pointed to the launch of its first Health Sciences Academy program, established across the county's four traditional high schools (Hoggard High School, Laney High School, Ashley High School and New Hanover High School), which started with 38 students last year. Mills also pointed to growth in the district’s Nursing Fundamentals course, which grew from 10 seats in 2023 to 50 in 2025-2026 and is now offered at all four traditional high schools. Watson emphasized the growing nursing class sizes and offered an update on the school’s accelerated nursing degree, which launched last year. Eleven students graduated in the first class, and all passed their boards on the first try, Watson said. This year’s class has 24 students. When the endowment announced its $22.3 million grant for the collaborative in 2023, UNCW and CFCC were each slated to receive the bulk of the funds, at about $10 million each. UNCW’s plans for the grant money included expanding its simulation lab, Watson said. He added that construction is expected to begin on the simulation lab this year and will likely extend through next year. According to Mary Ellen Naylor, dean of Health & Human Services at CFCC, the college has experienced growth in its associate degree nursing retention, rising from 59% in 2023 to 76% for the May 2026 class. CFCC used part of its endowment funding to support wraparound services, including a housing stipend, tuition assistance, exam assistance, emergency assistance, drop-in daycare and clinical and educational supplies. "We have very strong … students, but once they get into the program, there are competing priorities,” Naylor said. “They are working multiple jobs. They have children. They're single parents." According to Naylor, in 2026, 94% of students who used support services are still enrolled or have graduated. Addressing a question from an audience member about an approaching “enrollment cliff,” driven largely by dropping birth rates, Watson and Naylor said demand remains strong at both schools. “Right now … we do have more applicants than we have spots in our nursing program, and it is still a competitive process to get into,” Watson said. “I do not foresee that changing.” "(We've) doubled enrollment in our nursing programs over the last few years, but just as Dean Watson said, we still have very robust applicant pools, so it is still very competitive to get in,” Naylor said. "We have the applicant pool to support that, but again, it's not as easy as just saying, 'Okay … we're going to take another 90 students.' It's making sure all the resources and infrastructure that we need to educate the students outside the classroom is there as well." In response to a question about applying the collaborative model to other healthcare positions besides nursing, Sophie Dagenais, CEO and president of the endowment, said she sees the potential for the model to expand to other healthcare jobs and even other industries, but that the endowment hopes to learn from this model first. “This is a grant that is in year two of three years, and first we wanted to learn what is this going to demonstrate, what will we learn and then how may we scale it possibly,” she said. According to endowment spokesperson Amber Rogerson, funds for the program are set to expire after June 2027. “It's too early to discuss what happens after that,” wrote Rogerson in an email, “though we know the partners are considering the future, and some of the work supported by the grants is now built into their regular operations.”
Arteta 'didn't learn' from Brighton's fast start
Arsenal podcaster Alan Alger says Mikel Arteta "didn't learn" from Brighton's fine start in their 3-0 win over the Gunners on Saturday. The Seagulls' high press smothered Arteta's side, who struggled to match the intensity of their opponents, before Pascal Gross opened the scoring after half an hour. My one big criticism of Arteta is that in his quotes he said 'we will learn from this' - but he didn't learn from watching the first 20 minutes happening in front of him.
PFC Preview: What is Health Law? - Petrie-Flom Center
Our lunchtime panel What is Health Law? is happening next week. It’s open to the public, and especially great for students interested in learning more about the intersection of law and healthcare as a possible career focus.
A Texas-Sized Data Gap: How Anti-Abortion and Anti-Trans Politics Threaten Birth Justice
What happens when our data sources–like birth certificates, death certificates, and medical records–lose their integrity to comply with anti-trans state laws?
Taylor Swift announces 'The Life of a Showgirl: The Encore' with 4 new songs after Swifties try to decode her mysterious zeros
Swifties, it's happening: Our favorite pop star is releasing new music.
Here's what's happening in St. Helena
Here's what's happening in St. Helena in the next few weeks.
The An-124 Charter Business: Antonov, Volga-Dnepr, SALIS
How NATO ended up renting Soviet-designed freighters from a Ukrainian and a Russian airline — and what happened to the An-124 charter market after 2022.
What happens when politics mix with medicine in Pennsylvania's measles outbreak?
There are nearly 800 measles cases in Pennsylvania.
What happened to ‘The Love Boat’ cast? See the crew of the Pacific Princess 40 years later
That swirling theme music could mean only one thing: The Pacific Princess was pulling in with its appealing crew and oodles of celebrity guests. See the stars of ‘The Love Boat’ more than 40 years after the finale.
Lost your job? What to know about COBRA, marketplace health insurance
As layoffs hit North Texas, workers facing job changes may also have to figure out what happens to their health insurance.
Vikings Get Intriguing Justin Herbert Take Amid Chargers Struggles
The Minnesota Vikings don’t have a long-term solution yet at QB. That could change in the coming weeks if Kyler Murray performs well and leads the Vikings to wins. However, if that doesn’t happen and Minnesota needs to lean on Carson Wentz again this season, then general manager Nolan Teasley might need to look at […] The post Vikings Get Intriguing Justin Herbert Take Amid Chargers Struggles appeared first on HEAVY.
The Final Six to Glory
As the international break has come upon us, it is time once again to slow down and take a look at what is happening in the run-in in K League 2. For Seoul E-Land FC, something that was once seen as a...
Entertainers face mental health pressures behind the Las Vegas spotlight
More than one in 10 Nevadans work in the hospitality or entertainment industry, and experts say the pressure of that work can come at a high cost for the people who make it happen.
Entertainers face mental health pressures behind the Las Vegas spotlight
More than one in 10 Nevadans work in the hospitality or entertainment industry, and experts say the pressure of that work can come at a high cost for the people who make it happen.
No decision made on possible NHL expansion to Houston or Austin
Expansion, if it happens, would involve a $3.5 billion investment between the fee paid to owners and the cost to build a new arena.
First-ever literary festival planned for Orange County
What happens when you bring together four Orange County writers with a goal to recognize its proud literary heritage and honor the poets, novelists, memoirists and others who have shaped
Google is reinventing the Thompson Center. Hear from the team making it happen.
Crain’s will explore what Google’s investment could mean for the future of downtown Chicago at a live event on Oct. 14.
Jewel Reveals How She Teaches Her Teenage Son About ‘Mental Health Hygiene’
Jewel, 52, knows firsthand what happens when a child’s emotional needs go unmet, and she’s determined to give her own son a different experience. Having lived through a chaotic childhood that included...
Taylor Swift announces new single 'Patient Zero' after Swifties try to decode her mysterious zeros
Swifties, it's happening: Our favorite pop star is releasing new music.
News 40 Weather Report: The science behind the first day of fall
BOWLING GREEN, Ky. – It’s the first day of fall. That means different things to different people. It may be as simple as leaves falling or pumpkins popping up everywhere…evening in coffee. But there’s a scientific aspect to fall…and it’s called the equinox. The autumnal equinox, to be exact. Equinox means “equal nights”…an occurrence that happens two days every year…the...
The Man Shot by ICE in Austin Speaks
The lawyer of Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, currently being held in an ICE detention center with a bullet in his back, held a press conference yesterday. Perez happened to call in.
Around 7,000 Years Ago, The Genetic Diversity Of Males Crashed: What The Hell Happened?
Did generations of violent inter-clan warfare nearly decimate the genetic diversity of males?
When treachery abounds, entertainment resounds - The Voice of San Francisco
Betrayal is disheartening and debilitating, unless it’s happening to someone in a movie. Then, it’s diverting. For example, The Weight is a tension-loaded drama that follows a criminal expedition into the wilds of the Pacific Northwest in the 1930s and hinges on shady people depending on each other in extreme circumstances. As for The Musical, […]
“Politics Are Desperately Important at the Moment”: Bill McKibben on Midterms, Trump & Climate Crisis
Ahead of the midterm elections, activist and writer Bill McKibben says he has been traveling across the United States with Third Act, the environmental group he founded to harness the power of seniors who care about the climate and democracy. “These elections are also starting to set the groundwork for 2028,” says McKibben, who calls the next U.S. presidential vote “maybe the last election that happens in a timeframe when we still really have an opportunity to affect some of the outcomes of these things.”
Arsenal Women’s start raises early title concerns
Another slow start threatens to derail Arsenal’s title challenge before it really gets going.Photo by Sarah Ray-Gain/Getty ImagesBefore this season, the manager and players knew what had happened in...
Is 50 the new 60?
Subscribe TL;DR: Younger generations are showing signs of worse health compared to earlier-born cohorts at the same age This backward “drift” is showing up both in mortality risk and chronic disease Worsening trends in obesity and diabetes are the most consistent signals Taking the long view, we’ve made astonishing gains in health and life expectancy in the last century. Global average life expectancy has more than doubled from 32 years in 1900 to 73 years in 2024. (But don’t forget, there were still old people when life expectancy was 32). As people lived longer, they also generally lived healthier along the way. It turns out that avoiding things that can kill you early, like malnutrition and lots of childhood infections, also keeps you healthier later in life. In a classic 2004 paper, Finch and Crimmins proposed that cohorts of children who benefited from fewer early life infections had less lifetime exposure to inflammation and cardiovascular disease later in life, accelerating mortality improvements at older ages. Poor nutrition in the womb has also been linked to a higher risk of later chronic disease. The upshot is that improvements in childhood health can pay dividends many decades later. The combination of better living conditions (nutrition, sanitation) and medical advances (antibiotics, vaccines, blood pressure meds, etc) meant that people’s healthy lifespan generally expanded, even as they lived longer. Aging researchers call this best-case scenario “compression of morbidity”—meaning we delay the onset of disease and disability even faster than the years of life we are adding. During my 20+ year research career, we could generally bank on the idea that younger generations would not only live longer but also keep getting healthier along the way. “60 is the new 50” as they say… Enter “Generational Health Drift” Sadly, this expectation of steady progress may be changing. You’ve probably heard that US life expectancy gains have slowed to a crawl in the past couple of decades. Mortality improvements are also slowing (though less dramatically) in many other high-income countries (you can read more about that in a review paper I wrote here). Mortality is a very blunt health measure, but it is often a good barometer for the broader population health trends happening underneath. And we are now seeing that younger generations may be in worse health at similar ages compared to earlier born cohorts. My collaborator Prof. George Ploubidis at University College London coined this worsening health in more recently born cohorts “generational health drift.” “Generational health drift” is bad news on multiple fronts. Most obviously, we don’t want our health progress to go backward. But the timing is also bad, since our populations are aging. In demographic terms, “population aging” means that the proportion of the population at older ages (i.e >65 years) is increasing. Fun demography fact: Current population aging is not due to the recent declines in the birth rates making the news, but declines in fertility decades ago, after the “baby boom.” As baby boomers reach older ages, the smaller cohorts behind them mean the percentage of older adults will increase. For example, the share of the population age 65 and older in the US increased from 12.4% in 2004 to 18.0% in 2024. This story of population aging was written long ago. Many worry that population aging will put pressure on health care and pension systems. But if people reach older ages in better health than in years past, those fiscal pressures would be less dire than projected. Healthy older people can also continue to contribute to society in many valuable ways, including paid work, caregiving, community service….even high political office 🤷. On the flip side, if younger generations reach retirement age in worse health and with more disabling conditions, this could magnify the societal challenge of population aging. Evidence for worsening generational health A recent paper that I LOVED in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Dr. Leah Abrams and colleagues examined which birth cohorts (aka generations) were behind worsening US mortality. Behold the Lexis diagram (cue swooning demographers). Calendar time is on the x-axis, age on the y-axis. Birth cohorts can be followed over time as they age on the diagonal lines moving up and to the right. This figure plots the year-on-year % change in all-cause mortality at a given age. Green shading indicates mortality improvements over time, white is stagnation, and gray shading indicates worsening mortality. Following the diagonal line for those born in 1950, you can see a noticeable shift from green to gray that follows this cohort for most of their lives. This gray shading shows generally worsening mortality for the 1950 to 1959 birth cohorts compared to their predecessors across all ages. Concerningly for my GenX and elder millennial peeps, there was also a deterioration in mortality for birth cohorts born in the 1970s and 1980s, visible as dark gray areas at ages 30 to 45 during the 2010s. While some of these mortality changes reflect specific shocks such as the opioid epidemic, most deaths still occur from major causes of death such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. For cancer, the gray in the top left corner of the figure below reflects the legacies of smoking for older cohorts, followed by a period of green with improvements in cancer mortality as smoking rates declined. But the white/gray shading in the bottom right corner highlights a stagnation and reversal of the cancer trends, with cohorts born around 1970 to 1985 experiencing worsening cancer mortality. This deterioration was most noticeable for colon cancer mortality, possibly linked to obesity or dietary factors. Not just dying more, but less healthy along the way. A recent paper by Dr. Laura Gimeno of University College London (of which I am a co-author), found evidence that more recently born cohorts in Great Britain have stagnating or worsening health. A stylized picture of what“generational health drift” might look like: The review paper found: Rates of childhood overweight and obesity were highest among Gen Z. Rates of diabetes in the 40s almost doubled from 3.1% among the Baby Boomers to 5.9% in Generation X. Gen Z reported higher rates of poor mental health in adolescence compared to earlier-born groups. These UK results are consistent with studies showing worsening health across generations in the US as well. A 2021 US study found that more recently born cohorts had worse biological markers (like blood pressure and blood sugar) than earlier generations at the same age. A separate 2022 study of Americans aged 50 and over found that more recently born generations had a higher number of chronic diseases, with younger age of disease onset. A 2024 Lancet paper found that in the US, women born in 1945 had 33% obesity prevalence at age 50, rising to 48.2% for women born in 1970 turning 50. So what’s going on, and can we turn it around? We don’t have a definitive answer for what’s causing the deteriorating health of younger cohorts, but circumstantial evidence points to worsening trends in obesity and diabetes in both the US and UK. Remember that cohort trends reflect lagged effects of early environments, and younger generations have faced both earlier onset and more severe obesity across their lifetimes. Despite these very concerning trends, the future is not set in stone. We’ve reversed poor generational health trends before: drops in smoking are a major reason cancer and heart disease deaths fell so dramatically in recent decades. GLP-1 drugs may finally turn the tide against rising rates of obesity and diabetes, though it is still early days. But things could also get worse…for example from a return to higher levels of childhood infectious diseases that can have a lasting impact on health. See for example: [ ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) [ Don’t You Forget About Me(asles): The Virus That Erases Immune Memory ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Jenn Dowd, PhD · March 24, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://jenndowd.substack.com/p/dont-you-forget-about-measles-the) Even as an optimist, emerging data on the “generational health drift” has my full attention. For most of my research career, we took it for granted that each generation would be healthier than the last. But if present trends continue, **50 could be the new 60….**and Gen Z celebrities will soon look older than Paul Rudd :). Stay well, Jenn Share the Health! If you found this post useful, please share it with a friend. Share
Bruins vs. Flyers PRESEASON PREVIEW:
Just the Facts What happened last game? The Bruins played a tight game where Jake Schmaltz and Charlie McAvoy scored, and it went to the shootout with James Hagens once again stepping in to play the hero. Bruins WIN 3-2! Mike DiPietro also had a huge game for your Boston Bruins, as he stopped 30 […]
Newtown Restaurant And Business Appreciation Week October 16-25
The Economic and Community Development (ECD) office, in partnership with The Restaurant Week Company, will be promoting “Newtown Restaurant and Business Appreciation Week,” happening October 16-25. EC...
Bromance Breakup? ‘Definitely Cut Jon Jones’
That wasn’t supposed to happen. UFC 331 featured one of the biggest upsets of all time, as Sean Sharaf scored the first win of his UFC career by starching Olympic gold medalist and Jon Jones’ protege Gable Steveson (watch here). In the literal first exchange of the fight, Sharaf caught Steveson pulling backwards with a […]
Poetic Science in Plato's "Timaeus" ~ The Imaginative Conservative
What happens when one mixes science and poetry in the way that Timaeus does? What can we learn from this strange mix? My intention is to place before us some important themes that connect poetry and science. She was the single
‘The Humanities’ has too much going on
The world premiere of Zayd Ayers Dohrn's “The Humanities” at Victory Gardens Theater, directed by interim artistic director Edward Torres, purports to be about what happens when a controversial speaker
Mayor, business owners cast blame after another River Market shooting
The Little Rock Police Department is investigating a shooting that happened over the weekend, just a few feet away from the Arkansas Times offices.
Science provided advance information about the end of civilization What will happen on November 13, 2026?
Scientists have predicted that the end of the world is approaching, with the end of civilization projected before the end of 2026.
"Can and will happen": A deadly ‘tsunami from the sky’ could soon hit the US, warn experts
The recent disaster in Nepal may be a warning of what's to come for the rest of the world
Deputies release surveillance pictures of burglary happening inside local business
Surveillance pictures show a burglary inside a business and deputies are asking for the public's help solving the case.
Dem lawmakers scoff at Trump's $5K 'fantasy land' promise: 'Ain't happening'
President Donald Trump's $5,000 dividend pledge faces bipartisan pushback, with Democrats calling it a "bribe" and Republicans questioning its feasibility.
Prince George's County leaders discuss mental health after man's death by suicide
After a man was found hanging from a tree in Prince George's County over the weekend, elected leaders are speaking out about what actually happened and the ment
NBC’s ‘Line of Fire’ is what happens when you combine a procedural TV show with a soap opera
TV creator Joshua Safran is introducing "Line of Fire," a new NBC show blending elements of a crime procedural with a soap opera.
NBC's 'Line of Fire' is what happens when you combine a procedural TV show with a soap opera
TV creator Joshua Safran is introducing "Line of Fire," a new NBC show blending elements of a crime procedural with a soap opera | WBBM Newsradio 780 AM & 105.9 FM
NBC's 'Line of Fire' is what happens when you combine a procedural TV show with a soap opera
TV creator Joshua Safran is introducing "Line of Fire," a new NBC show blending elements of a crime procedural with a soap opera | 1010 WINS
NBC's 'Line of Fire' is what happens when you combine a procedural TV show with a soap opera
TV creator Joshua Safran is introducing "Line of Fire," a new NBC show blending elements of a crime procedural with a soap opera | KCBS All News 106.9FM and 740AM
Red Sox Roman Anthony Makes Personal Admission After Playoff Clinch
The Boston Red Sox lost to the Rays 5-1 on Sunday afternoon at Tropicana Field. The game itself did not matter. What happened later did.The Braves beat the Astros to eliminate Houston from wild card contention, and the Red Sox’ postseason berth became official. Players pulled on celebration gear and goggles, posed for a team […] The post Red Sox Roman Anthony Makes Personal Admission After Playoff Clinch appeared first on HEAVY.
Chocolate leads to better workouts, says science — and you don't even have to eat it
A new study found that something surprising happens in your brain around chocolate, giving you more energy. Here's what's going on.
How red went from the color of revolution to the color of Republicans in US politics
For American conservatives of the Cold War era, red was the color of communists and the mistrusted American left. Now, it’s the color of the GOP, while Democrats are blue. How did this happen?
What events are happening in the South Bend area from Sept. 21 to 27?
From fall festivals to haunted parks and film screenings, here is a guide to events happening Sept 21 to Sept 27.
Whether you like it or not, celebrities have an impact on politics
The global groundswell of support for Macklemore’s pro-Palestinian advocacy serves to remind us that maybe celebrity activism really is that deep after all, writes Cheek’s Varsha Yajman. Subscribe In the last week, publications, podcasts, and influencers that have either rarely or never spoken about Israel’s genocide in Palestine have flooded my social feed. And it was all because singer Ed Sheeran and his team dropped Macklemore as his opener for saying “Free Palestine” on stage. Millions raised, millions speaking up in support of Palestine - all of this confirming my view that, whether I like it or not, celebrities do have an impact on political outcomes. And this is interesting when much of the time celebrity activism can induce an eye roll - I love to see Charli XCX pointing out a Palestinian flag in the crowd, but it’s hardly the bold symbol of allyship that some fans would make it out to be. But there’s a line between healthy scepticism and outright dismissal - and I’d argue that the latter lets the rich and powerful off far too easily. For instance, actress Jennifer Lawrence, once outspoken about her political views, last year told The Times she no longer believes celebrities have a role to play: “Celebrities do not make a difference whatsoever on who people vote for. So then what am I doing? I’m just sharing my opinion on something that’s going to add fuel to a fire that’s ripping the country apart.” While it’s a narrative she might find comfort in, it simply is not true. Grassroots movements often garner worldwide attention when celebrities and other high-profile spokespeople bring a mainstream platform to their causes. And this frustrates me. We have had three years of a live-streamed genocide. Macklemore himself has been calling for a Free Palestine long before he booked the Sheeran concert. Yet it’s the high-profile fallout of the last week that finally seems to have made saying “Free Palestine” socially acceptable in the mainstream. It feels like the collective mood has shifted, where calling out censorship is now the obvious response - not just the business of ‘radical’ activists. To recap, Sheeran’s decision followed an ultimatum from billionaire Robert Kraft, owner of Gillette Stadium, one of the venues Sheeran was scheduled to perform at: either drop Macklemore as your opener after only two of the eight scheduled shows, or you do not play at any stadiums. Sheeran’s disappointing decision to stand on the side of billionaire-led censorship has ultimately seen a surge in support for Free Palestine. It began when all his openers and his backing band pulled out of Sheeran’s tour, in solidarity with Macklemore and with the Palestinian cause. It was met with an uproar of support from those who had never or barely touched politics before: influencers lip-syncing to Macklemore’s music, singers like Jack Antonoff singing “Free Palestine,” and publications and podcasts standing with Macklemore. And finally, we saw material support: Macklemore donated $1 million in profits from his two nights opening for Sheeran’s tour to several Palestinian aid groups and called for Sheeran and Kraft to match it, which they have since promised to do. We’ve also seen children’s entertainer Ms Rachel follow suit with a $1 million donation to Palestinian aid, and publication PopBase has donated $10,000. Anera, a humanitarian aid group working in Palestine, Lebanon, and Jordan, said donations since Macklemore’s announcement were more than triple this month’s daily average. The group’s Instagram page has also gained 8,000 followers. Macklemore far from the first celebrity to speak and participate in politics in the Western World. In 1924, singer Al Jolson supported Republican candidate Warren G. Harding for president, and decades later, celebrities such as Harry Belafonte, Lena Horne, and Aretha Franklin voiced their public support for the Civil Rights movement. More recently, in the lead-up to the 2024 US election, ‘The Daily Show with Trevor Noah partnered with the organisation Power the Polls to recruit poll workers to address shortages- a problem disproportionately affecting voters of colour. The campaign saw 170,000 new sign-ups - 35,000 of which came directly through the TV show’s link - resulting in the recruitment of 713,000 total poll workers that year, an almost three-fold increase on the organisation’s goal. Alongside recruiting workers, celebrities in the US (where voting in elections is not compulsory) have made a huge difference by calling for people to register to vote. Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris in 2024 saw over 400,000 visitors on the voter registration site within 24 hours of her Instagram post. In 2023, Swift had urged her fans to register, resulting in 35,000 new voter registrations. Similarly, Ariana Grande promoted voter registration in 2019 by setting up booths at concerts on the American leg of her tour, resulting in over 33,000 voters registering. And the same thing is happening closer to home. This year, musician Jack River successfully called for government action to ensure creatives in Australia do not have their work scraped by generative AI companies. Celebrity as the mediator between the punter and the politician Celebrity activism isn’t just a feel-good news story - research tells us it actually makes a difference. By directing attention to issues affecting the average person, like voting inaccessibility or a lack of action on a genocide, researchers Alfred Archer and Amanda Cawston state that “celebrities can play a useful bridging role between political elites and the people they represent”. Alternatively, in a world where talking about politics is “not cool,” or where people lack exposure or knowledge to engage with politics, celebrities can act as an educational resource or an entry point into the political world - when they speak up about an issue, their audience gets exposed to it. Olivia Rodrigo’s Daisy Chain Fields festival is a perfect example. Rodrigo partnered with twelve organisations focused on women’s issues, such as reproductive rights. These organisations had stalls at the festival for people to meet them and were also featured heavily on social media, giving their issues global attention and raising $20 million for the organisations. We have also seen celebrities at award shows such as the Emmys wearing F*CK ICE pins, referring to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s treatment and detainment of people - generally people of colour. When celebrities speak up about political issues in public forums, they put the issue at the forefront of mainstream media, rally their supporters, and make it clear that, however much they disagree, the government cannot simply ignore it. Our over-reliance on celebrities versus our politicians As much as I love seeing my favourite celebrity use their platform for a good cause, there is an important question to ask: not whether celebrity activism is good or bad, but whether we should have to rely on celebrities. And the answer would, in an ideal world, be no. In an ideal world, or merely a just world, action on Palestine would’ve happened decades ago, climate change would be taken seriously, and most importantly, people would understand their democratic rights. However, that is not our reality. Only around 28 per cent of Australian Year 10 students reach proficiency in civics and citizenship. In the US, almost two-thirds of people under 30 say high school civics education didn’t prepare them to understand voting deadlines, how to research candidates, or how to vote by mail. When civics education is weak, our trust in these institutions and our understanding of change-making processes also decline. This is where celebrity steps in and becomes our main source of reliance. As Mary R. Connelly notes in _The Tartan, “_Celebrities will always be involved in campaigns in one form or another, but their presence is not what causes people to vote blindly. The lack of political engagement and literacy is what allows celebrities to wield their influence on the political sphere so impactfully.” About the author Varsha Yajman is the Digital Content Producer at Cheek Media. She is a youth advocate and lawyer with a background in climate litigation and is passionate about looking at the intersection between race, climate justice, and mental health. Thanks for reading Cheek Media Co. ! This post is public so feel free to share it. Share
Kelly McKenna: Managing My Health
Kelly McKenna shares about navigating through her health struggles. I was in first grade when my friend approached me, “John pushed Will down the stairs,” he said. I froze. “Stay strong,” I told myself. Will is my brother. He lives with a disability, and moments like this happened often. I didn’t have words like “fight-or-flight”
A New York City marsh was disappearing for decades; scientists added 20 inches of sand and watched what happened next
By Muskan Singh & ET Science Desk, Global Desk For decades, salt marshes across New York City’s Jamaica Bay had been disappearing. At Big Egg Marsh, scientists decided to try something that could reveal whether one damaged piece of marsh could be given a better chance to survive. The solution was surprisingly simple, to raise... Read More
Hampshire politicians back calls for mayoral election in 2027
Politicians say mayoral election in Hampshire and the Solent should happen in 2027 to "receive promised funding".
Spygate: Southampton and Tonda Eckert await FA ruling
As Southampton manager Tonda Eckert awaits the FA hearing into his 'Spygate' misconduct conduct charge BBC sports editor Dan Roan speaks to him and club chief executive Phil Parsons on what happens next.
Rockies Know That 100 Losses Are Probably Happening
Sunday's one-run loss to the Seattle Mariners only pushed the Colorado Rockies further down the road to that century defeat level.
What Happens if Browns vs Bucs Cannot Resume Sunday
What happens if the Browns-Buccaneers game can’t resume today? Here’s how the NFL could handle a postponement and when the game could be completed. The post What Happens if Browns vs Bucs Cannot Resume Sunday appeared first on HEAVY.
When Will Browns-Buccaneers Game Resume After Delay?
Why was the Browns-Buccaneers game delayed? Here's inside what happened.
Charles Schwab Bank is making a big investment in Fort Worth entrepreneurs and small business owners.
Also, burger brand loyalty; Goodwill opening; rodeo boots up; Mansfield real estate; and more Tarrant County business happenings.
3 Things To Learn From AFC Bournemouth 0-1 Liverpool
The 3 important talking points from Cherries 1-0 defeat to Andoni Iraola's Liverpool side are subject to even more frustration throughout the game, with big changes needing to happen, especially in the last 30 minutes of the game.
Man Utd frustrated at the Premier League's second-bottom side!
What is happening at Manchester United?A terrible week for the Red Devils. After the 11-v-10 defeat to Manchester City and the loss after leading 2-0 against Brighton in the League Cup, the Mancunians...
Why politicians should pay more attention to the polls (reprise)
Welcome to the 231st edition of The Week in Polls (TWIP), a polling newsletter that always welcomes new readers. So please don’t keep TWIP a secret; share it with your friends and colleagues: Share The Week in Polls With all the stories swirling around Reform, JL Partners and political polling, I am finally tearing myself away from talking about the regulation of polling this week - and instead re-running a previous piece reminding us why the solution to problems with polls isn’t simply to ban or ignore them. Rather, we need them to play a vital role in making our politics - and politicians - better. This is followed by summaries of the latest national voting intention polls, seat projections from MRPs and the most recent party leader ratings. Subscribers who pay for the full edition can also read ten insights from the latest polls and analyses, including: A trio of organisations and a pair of professors have been casting their eyes over the Liberal Democrats ahead of the party’s autumn conference; What impact did the summer heatwave have on views on climate change? and Which wins out between chocolate and cheese? If you are not yet a paid subscriber, you can read all ten by starting a free trial now: Get FREE 7-day trial For more polling news as it comes in ahead of next week’s edition, you can also follow The Week in Polls on Bluesky. Picking up on my doubt last week about whether or not 35% of British train travellers have tried to order a takeaway for delivery to a railway station or carriage, thank you to reader Iain, who has been in touch to say he has done just that… in India. Another quick pair of updates, this time on the controversies around Reform and polling. Politico has a further scoop - “Farage aide caught in donor sting attended Egypt retreat with JL Partners” - and Ian Dunt has written about the problems with polling too: “Seeing the response of many polling experts in the last few weeks suggests that they are nervous about what is happening and keen to mitigate against it. Seeing the response of journalists, which has been basically non-existent, suggests the precise opposite.” My usual reminder as well: please do hit reply if you’ve spotted a poll, focus group or new piece of poll-based research that you think should be in contention for coverage in a future edition. Thank you! And with that, on with the show. How politicians get public opinion wrong I have written before about the benefits that come from widespread availability of high-quality political polling. We need more polls and more good coverage of polls. However, what I’ve not dug into before is the research into how accurately politicians estimate public opinion on issues. Thankfully we have academic research to tell us. First, the bad news: We present results from a study of 866 politicians in four countries.1 Politicians were asked to estimate the percentage of public support for various policy proposals. Comparing more than 10,000 estimations with actual levels of public support, we conclude that politicians are quite inaccurate estimators of people’s preferences. They make large errors and even regularly misperceive what a majority of the voters wants. Politicians are hardly better at estimating public preferences than ordinary citizens. Walgrave, S., Jansen, A., Sevenans, J., Soontjens, K., Pilet, J.B., Brack, N., Varone, F., Helfer, L., Vliegenthart, R., van der Meer, T., Breunig, C., Bailer, S., Sheffer, L. & Loewen, P.J. (2023a), “Inaccurate Politicians: Elected Representatives’ Estimations of Public Opinion in Four Countries”, The Journal of Politics, 85(1): 209-222. The bad news is not quite as bad as that makes it sound because, when asked whether the majority of public opinion was for or against various policies, politicians picked the wrong option ‘only’ 29% of the time. However, this included getting it wrong even when public opinion is far from evenly split on an issue: They do not only get it wrong when the public is divided and hard to read (e.g., when there is a 51%:49% distribution). Seventy percent of the misplacements occur for policies with a relatively clear distribution of at least 60% (dis)agreeing citizens. Moreover, the public scored only slightly worse than politicians, picking the wrong option 2.7 out of 8 times on average, compared with 2.3 times for politicians. Turning to the other measure of accuracy (not which side is in the lead but what the percentage support is for each side), politicians on average were 18 percentage points out in their guesses. Again, this was only slightly better than the public, whose error came in at 21 percentage points.2 Further research, using the same mix of countries, gives a little more comfort about how (in)accurate perceptions are: We show that politicians have a better understanding of public opinion when they think the issue matters to voters. Further, when an issue is personally important to politicians they more accurately estimate their party supporters’ opinions. The results confirm that politicians hold more accurate perceptions of voters’ preferences when they think it is important to do so but not necessarily when the issues actually are important to voters. Butler, C., Walgrave, S., Soontjens, K. & Loewen, P.J. (2024), “Politicians are better at estimating public opinion when they think it is more salient”, Party Politics: 1–13. Even so, it’s not a good picture. The remedy for this? Politicians should spend more time reading the polls. So forward this newsletter to someone you know… Share For a more general argument against banning polls, see my 2024 piece. Is “Let Bartlet Be Bartlet” good advice or not? The latest episode of my Political Fictions podcast heads across the Atlantic for a dip into one of the political TV classics: Mark and Cory talk about a giant of American political drama for the first time this week, as they tackle The West Wing. They talk about Let Bartlet Be Bartlet, the nineteenth episode of series one. In it, Mark wonders if The West Wing is actually the epitome of the “Boris Johnson school of politics”, Cory outmanoeuvres Mark into confirming we will record a Christmas Special about Love, Actually and they debate whether the central message of this episode has been misunderstood. Cory’s email newsletter is Paperback Rioter and Mark has a family of email newsletters. Subscribe to our newsletter for some additional bonus content and to get alerted whenever a new episode comes out. Our theme tune is “Monkeys Spinning Monkeys” by Kevin MacLeod/incompetech.com and licensed under the Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License. You can also listen to our episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the web or YouTube. Elsewhere from me… [ A Lord's Eye View How to fix the problem of money in our politics Welcome to my latest update on work in the House of Lords. This time I am taking a look at how our political system is regulated, and the protections we need to keep democracy safe from becoming simply a contest to see who has the biggest bank account… Read more 5 days ago · 3 likes · 2 comments · Mark Pack ](https://lordseyeview.substack.com/p/how-to-fix-the-problem-of-money-in?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web&embedding_publication_id=1269283) If you spot a factual error… Borrowing an idea from Stuart Ritchie and others, if you spot a factual error in an edition of this newsletter, I will give you a free 12-month subscription to the paid-for version (or an extra 12 months on your existing one). Factual errors qualify, but grammatical errors or disagreements over interpretation do not, and my decision is final. Messages about both of those are always welcome, though. Voting intention and leadership ratings Here are the latest voting intention polls from different pollsters. It is all pretty static at the moment, with a small and consistent Labour lead in nearly all the polls. The table is also online here, along with explanations about what is included. It is updated regularly throughout the week as new polls are released. Next are the seat projections from MRPs, also sorted by fieldwork dates, listing those which are based on dedicated fieldwork (rather than models based on averages of other polls). Because such MRPs are published infrequently, some of the entries below are quite old. Finally, here is a summary of leadership ratings, with a graph from PollCheck: Detailed numbers from the latest polls are online here, and both that and the graph are updated regularly throughout the week as new data comes out. For historical figures on both voting intention and leader approval stretching back to the 1930s, including Parliamentary by-election polls, see PollBase. Catch up on the previous two editions [ ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ A crisis point for political polling Sep 13 ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ Read full story ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) [ Extra questions about the polls in Reform’s funding scandal Sep 6 ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) [ Read full story ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) My privacy policy and other legal information are available here. Links to purchase books or other items are usually affiliate links which pay a commission for each sale. Quotes from social media messages are occasionally lightly edited for punctuation and clarity. If you are subscribed to other email lists of mine, please note that unsubscribing from this one will not automatically remove you from the others. If you wish to be removed from all my lists, simply reply to this email to let me know. A quintet of Lib Dem polling analyses, and 9 other polling insights you shouldn’t miss The following ten findings from the most recent polls and analyses are only for subscribers who pay for the full edition, but you can sign up for a free trial to read them straight away. Ahead of the start of Liberal Democrat conference, we have a trio of organisations and a pair of professors with pieces out about Ed Davey’s party:
Analysis: Eagles unlucky to not gain win
This was a good test for boss Pierre Sage, with the Eagles playing on Thursday in the Europa League and having three days less preparation time than Leeds. Crystal Palace created the first chance of the match, only for Quinten Timber to fire over from 25 yards, before Adam Wharton and Tyrick Mitchell had their only other chances of note in the first half, with both strikes deflected and easily dealt with. Palace had conceded a late goal to lose 3-2 to Ipswich Town last weekend and it would have been harsh on them if something similar had happened here.
STRING’S SUNDAY MORNING THOUGHTS
Tbh before this season started I thought this was the year I made a clean break from writing for GBH. It’s been a good 15 year run and it’s time to just be done. And then yesterday happens…and here I am again on a Sunday morning needing to process my thoughts. I hate it but […]
What’s happening in Las Vegas this fall
Las Vegas entertainment event listings for September, October, November
Scientists Tried to Prove Out-of-Body Experiences Are Real. Here’s What Happened.
None of the 21 participants identified a hidden image, but two accurately described researchers' positions in observations that weren't formally tested.
Ed Sheeran Clarifies Gaza Stance, Again Blames Venues for Kicking Macklemore Off Tour
Sheeran called what’s happening in Gaza “catastrophic, unjustifiable, and disproportionate” but did not take responsibility for the rapper being removed from the show
Inside the White House media ban
Many senior staff were surprised by the directive, which happened while chief of staff Susie Wiles was out of town.
What happened to the ‘Eight Is Enough’ cast? See the stars nearly 50 years later
Nearly 50 years after ‘Eight Is Enough’ premiered, see what became of Dick Van Patten, Betty Buckley, Grant Goodeve, Dianne Kay, Willie Aames, and the rest of the Bradford clan.
Every '80s High Schooler Knew Every Word to This B-52's No.1 Hit; Rolling Stone Ranked It as One of the...
The tune almost never happened, Fred Schneider based it on a real club he used to visit.
Every '80s High Schooler Knew Every Word to This B-52's No.1 Hit; Rolling Stone Ranked It as One of the...
The tune almost never happened, Fred Schneider based it on a real club he used to visit.
Orlando Science Center opens renovated theater
A lot is happening at the Orlando Science Center. The organization recently reopened the Dome and hosted a series of sold-out laser shows this summer. A new exhibit called “Extreme Sports: Beyond Human Limits” opens in late September, showing visitors what it’s like to rock climb and use a flight suit. To top it off,
Did the Vikings really shoot fiery arrows at funeral boats?
The idea of Vikings using fire arrows to set funeral boats ablaze is seen frequently in popular culture. But did it really happen?
Ed Sheeran says situation in Gaza is \'catastrophic and unjustifiable\' as he opens concert
Ed Sheeran opened a concert in Philadelphia with comments about Gaza, saying what’s happening is “catastrophic and unjustifiable.” He said in the Saturday night performance at Lincoln Financial Field that
Ed Sheeran says situation in Gaza is \'catastrophic and unjustifiable\' as he opens solo concert
Ed Sheeran has opened a solo concert in Philadelphia with comments about Gaza, saying what’s happening is “catastrophic and unjustifiable.” He said in the Saturday night performance at Lincoln Financial
Volunteers help Carson City locals receive health checkups at first Love Heals Free Clinic
Locals unable to afford health checkups can get them done by medical professionals today, Saturday, at the Carson City Community Center during the first Love Heals Free Clinic event happening […]
The Human Brain Isn't Meant to Be Awake Past Midnight, Scientists Warn
Dangerous things can happen.
Hibernian 1-1 Aberdeen: What the manager said
From a club point of view they'll make the decision when it's ready to bring a new head coach in, or new coaching team. The players have got a few days off, and I'm sure I'll hear from the club at the start of the week what's happening.
Everything That Must Happen for Rangers to Make the Playoffs
As the Chicago White Sox stumble, the surging Texas Rangers must maintain their winning streak during this high-stakes eight-game final stretch.
What happened when scientists grew human brain tissue inside mice - Futura-Sciences
Without native tissue in the way, the transplanted human cells multiplied to five times their initial size, grew their own blood vessels, and connected directly to the mice’s spinal cords. Led by first author Kelley Kaganovsky and senior author Sergiu Pașca, the team published the findings in Nature on September...
Science Vs on the 49ers Substation: Anatomy of a Hatchet Job
In August, Pablo Torre Finds Out and Science Vs released an episode about my theory that electromagnetic fields from the electrical substation beside the 49ers facility may be contributing to the team’s run of soft-tissue injuries. As the originator of the theory, I was also a subject of the episode. I sat was interviewed by Wendy Zukerman and Rose Rimler of Sciene Vs. I sent them research, connected them with scientists, and spent hours digging through the City of Santa Clara’s and Silicon Valley Power’s records to help clarify critical details. Both Wendy and Rose came off as affable and professional, showing curiosity during the interviews, with Wendy going out of her way to question the “conspiracy theory” framing itself. Then they titled the episode We Solve the 49ers Viral Conspiracy Theory. I was familiar enough with their catalog that I never expected them to agree with my theory, but I did expect them to give it a fair hearing and to deliver their findings honestly. On both counts they came up short. They were not directly dishonest in anything they said, but rather in what they left out, in how what remained was cut, and in the picture painted by those two things in combination. They asked me to recorded the interview on my phone for better audio quality, and I held on to my copy for reference later. That turned out to be a fortuitous decision. Here is the raw audio of my first interview, unedited*. Only my side was recorded, so their questions aren’t on it, but you can generally infer them from the answers, and every claim I make below about what I said can be checked against my statements in this clip. (Note: Wendy had connection trouble at the beginning of the interview and was cutting in and out, which accounts for the false starts.) 0:00 -1:19:13 Audio playback is not supported on your browser. Please upgrade. Science Vs is a fun show. It is pitched at roughly a high-school understanding of science, for an audience that is skeptical, Snopes-oriented, and worried about misinformation. Take a claim circulating online, interview a supporter of the claim, interview consensus scientists, and then tell people which side of the line it lands on. I have listened to their episodes on raw milk, seed oils, 5G and other contested issues in the wellness space. I have problems with all of them, but each at least made an honest attempt to represent the actual range of scientific opinion by talking to credentialed scientists with differing perspectives. Dissenting researchers were heard from, answered, and often given a chance to respond. This episode did not do that. This article is not a relitigation of the science. I have written extensively about that already. This post is for the record. It is simply an accounting of what was wrong with their episode. Contents Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? — the clearest single example of getting something objectively wrong For the record — a high-level overview of all of the problems with their investigation Draw your own conclusions — why they had to make this episode at all What they left out about childhood leukemia — the exposure threshold, and playing games with statistics to minimize sick children What they left out about the mechanism — the body of literature they refused to cover, and evidence for the mechanism used against it The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air — four credential scientists who support myhe theory, recorded and cut, or not even called How they misrepresented me and my case — an answer severed from its question, and three telling edits How you would actually study the injuries — it doesn’t actually matter which team is the most injured, overall The theory: magnetic fields, oxidative stress, and collagen Since the episode never states my theory, here it is below. Those who are familiar with my work can skip this section. Electrical equipment produces magnetic fields, and those fields induce faint electrical currents in anything that passes through them, including people. My argument goes further than induced current. Mitochondria — the structures that generate a cell’s energy — run on continuous flows of electrons and protons, and those flows carry faint electromagnetic fields of their own. Maxwell’s principle of superposition shows that when two fields share the same space, they add together. An external field does not need to be strong to alter an internal field, it only needs to be present. The electron transport chain inside the mitochondria leaks a small fraction of its electrons by design, and those become reactive oxygen species — free radicals, which healthy cells use as signals. External magnetic fields cause the rate of leakage to change, increasing free radicals. When free radicals accumulate faster than the cell’s antioxidant systems can clear them, the result is oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a recognized driver of chronic illness, including cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, diabetes and cancer, and it is in every medical school curriculum. One of its ordinary effects in connective tissue is that it switches on matrix metalloproteinases — MMPs, the enzymes that break collagen apart — while suppressing new collagen synthesis. Tendons are made of collagen. An athlete loading his soft tissue heavily six days a week is already creating oxidative stress in the tendons, so the addition of magnetic field exposure compounds the damage and inhibits repair, making him more susceptible to injury when enormous force lands on a tendon in a fraction of a second. That is the theory. We know that EMF causes oxidative stress, and we know that oxidative stress degrades collagen. The only thing missing is a study showing that direct connection. I have never claimed certainty that the substation is contributing to the elevated injury rate. I do believe it is likely, and I believe it warrants caution, and that a revenue machine like a major NFL team can easily afford to remove the exposure out of precaution. Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? Here is the clearest single instance of the problem with this episode. It requires no knowledge of electromagnetic fields at all. This story first came to me through Jon Feliciano, a former 49er, in an interview on Willard & Dibs on 95.7 The Game. Asked about why the 49ers are always injured, he said players used to joke that it was the power plant behind the practice fields. Wendy Zukerman corrects him on air. “It’s important to say that it’s not a power plant near the 49ers site.” Torre then asks her to explain the difference between a substation and a power plant. Her answer: a power plant generates electricity and transmits it to a substation, which converts the voltage into something your house can use and sends it on to your home or your business. There are two problems with that. The first is that there is a power plant on that site. The Gianera Generating Station is a natural-gas-fired peaker plant owned by Silicon Valley Power, and it has been there since 1986. I have published aerial photographs of the location from 1987 in which the gas plant is the only thing standing, before the practice facility was even there. I even mentioned the gas plant in my first interview. (Feliciano has since gone on record about this issue, and it is clear he had the substation in mind rather than the gas plant.) The second is that her definition describes a distribution substation, and the facility beside the 49ers is not that. It is the Northern Receiving Station, which takes in bulk power from outside the city’s grid and delivers it to distribution substations. Silicon Valley Power’s own map distinguishes receiving stations from substations, and Rose Rimler even reads the label out loud in the episode when she walks through that map on air. A few minutes before the map segment, Zukerman tells Torre: “like I said, we fact check everything.” Well, maybe not everything. I made a mistake On the morning of July 6th, at 10:20, I sent Rose and Wendy two studies. During the interview I had been asked which human studies show oxidative stress from electromagnetic fields, and I had not been able to name one on the spot. Rose emailed asking for the studies, I quickly searched for a couple, and I wrote that I thought these were the most relevant from that search. Unfortunately, I was busy and did not read either one closely at first. I picked them because they were topically relevant — one on substation workers, one on power plant workers. Neither were great studies, and their problems go past the ones raised in the episode. That was careless on my part. There is context that did not make the episode, though. Before that email I had been on a Zoom call with Rose talking about EMF and oxidative stress, and I pointed her to Dr. Henry Lai at the University of Washington, who has spent years aggregating the literature on this question. His tallies show that roughly 90% of studies since the late 1990s find oxidative effects from electromagnetic field exposure — hundreds of studies, systematically counted. Rose told me she was already aware of his work. So when she asked for studies, I understood her to have the aggregate view already and that she would report anything within that context. Not reading those two carefully was still a mistake, but the larger mistake was assuming the episode would be based on a thorough review of the actual body of literature, rather than on whatever I happened to send that morning. The second email At 1:49 that same afternoon — three hours and twenty-nine minutes after the first — I sent them a second email that I had been preparing for a while. It was a structured document in six numbered sections, written in response to a request they had made two weeks earlier, laying out my entire argument with citations attached to every link in the chain. The episode aired on August 13th, five weeks later, and not a single item from the second email is in it. Here is how it opens: The full email is included at the bottom of this post in Appendix B. Nearly 1,500 words in total. It contains two named mechanisms with the physics behind them. Occupational studies in humans. The literature on oxidative stress and collagen. A section addressing the strongest counter-evidence against my own theory, which I raised myself. And a closing section stating plainly what the theory cannot yet show. My entire argument, in writing, with detailed citations for every claim, provided to them five weeks before broadcast, and none of it made it into the episode. That is the single largest omission, but it is not an isolated one. The whole episode is riddled with similar problems, and the conclusion they came to is not merely a difference of opinion about the scientific evidence. Through omission and through strategic editing, Science Vs misinformed its audience — about what the evidence shows, about what I argued, and about who they spoke to. That is a notable outcome for a show whose stated purpose is correcting misinformation. For the record I am not going to tell you that Science Vs set out to discredit me, or that they had come to their conclusion before they reported the story, or that they used misleading editing to make me look like a man retreating from his own theory. I cannot know what was in anyone’s head, and I am not going to pretend otherwise, either. What I can tell you is what is on the record. They asked me for evidence and aired the weakest thing I sent. They interviewed three scientists who supported my theory and aired none of them. They discussed childhood leukemia without ever saying the exposure level at which it appears. And they took an answer I gave weeks before Ken Karipidis, the one EMF scientist who was put on air, was interviewed, and placed it directly after his critique, where it comes off as a major concession. A friend of mine who has worked as a journalist for thirty years read that last one and called it sleazy. I agree with her. Those are just the four issues that are impossible to defend as pure editorial decision, but they are not the only issues. The most glaring issues stem from what they left out: The exposure level at which the childhood leukemia association actually appears — three to four milligauss, a number the episode never states despite it being much lower than what I measured. The mechanism itself: The episode gets as far as “oxidative stress could weaken collagen,” which leaves it sounding like speculation, rather than a known pathway. The second email, and all the studies in it. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill, whose work my proposed mechanism rests on, whose contact details I supplied, and who was never called. Dr. Beatrice Golomb at UC San Diego, who runs a research group on oxidative stress and mitochondrial function and has specific expdertice in collagen, interviewed and not aired. Dr. David Carpenter at Albany, the most prominent academic voice on the harm from magnetic field exposure, interviewed and not aired. Dr. Joel Moskowitz at Berkeley, interviewed and not even credited. The specific, testable condition I put in writing that would make me abandon the theory. My own unprompted statement of the theory’s evidentiary gap. My caveats about my own measurements. My ranking of EMF as one factor among several rather than the only one. The new equipment installed at those facilities between 2010 and 2014, and the sharp rise in system load from 2013 onward. But that is not all. What they kept, they selectively edited to serve a narrative that was not served by the raw transcripts of the interviews. A description of thousands of commercial routers in a workplace, reduced to the Wi-Fi in your house. My own acknowledgment, multiple times, that "I'm not a scientist" clipped in an episode that spends considerable energy pointing out that I am not a scientist. And a qualification I volunteered about my own measurements, cut from my answer and delivered later by their EMF expert as a correction. Together their edit produce a portrait of a wellness guy with Wi-Fi phobia and two bad studies, backing away from his theory the moment a “real” scientist looked at it. A practice facility where nothing changed because no new substation was built. Injuries written off as random because the 49ers were not quite the single most injured team in the league over the period in question. That portrait is false even though almost no individual statement made in the episode is. Draw your own conclusions At the top of the episode, Pablo Torre says his show had been flooded with requests to investigate the substation — that it was the thing they were asked to look into over and over again. Neither show went hunting for this story. It arrived from their own audience, in volume, and it could not be waved off. A thread I posted on X reached twenty-two million people. A guy with a gaussmeter and a brand-new Substack obligated a Pultizer prize winning program to spend an hour on a question about player health, that is considered fringe enough that most media operations won’t touch it. Pablo Torre Finds Out could not ignore it. So Science Vs came in and ran a “debunking” operation instead of an investigation. Everything below is what had to be left on the cutting room floor to deliver the “debunking”. They could not ignore it. So they tried debunked it instead. The demand was strong enough to force an episode, and since the episodes release the 49ers have sustained more injuries, including season ending ones, and interest has only grown. Demand from fans and playets is strong enough to force a better investigation from someone else. An omission is not a lie until you find out what was omitted. What follows is the detailed record so you can see the full picture. Draw your own conclusions. I have drawn mine. I am going to keep publishing. A note about Pablo Torre Finds Out After the episode aired I posted publicly, calling out Pablo Torre Finds Out for concerns I had about the integrity of their investigation, and about an interview directly with Pablo Torre which had been offered but never happened. I have since spoken with a producer at PTFO. The offer had rested on a misunderstanding about where things stood between us, and it fell away as the Science Vs part of the production widened past the science. He apologized for the miscommunication and I accepted. The producer also confirmed to me that they did essentially hand off the entire investigation to Science Vs for narrative purposes — so Pablo would be genuinely curious or potentially surprised by their findings — while still taking responsibility for what went out under their name. I appreciated the candor and the accountability, and I am comfortable with where we left things. So this post is not about PTFO. My disagreement is with Science Vs. What they left out about childhood leukemia Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They gave no number at all. 1. They built an EMF ruler, then discussed childhood cancer without it. The sequence on air went like this: First I measured almost 9 mG, then I measured up to 50 milligauss. Torre reacts with concern — “that sounds high.” Cut to Karipidis: the public limit is 2,000 milligauss. Torre reacts again — “What happens at 2,000?” Karipidis explains that nothing happens at 2,000, that safety factors are built in. Then: at more than 50,000 milligauss you get flickers of light in the retina, and higher still, nerve stimulation. The listener now has a ruler (their ruler) to measure these numbers with. Fifty is nothing by their ruler. Then the episode turns to childhood leukemia and states, accurately, that there is a real association — but tellingly, they never give the exposure level at which that association appears. Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They conveniently left that out. The pooled analyses that produced the World Health Organization’s carcinogen classification found roughly a doubling of childhood leukemia risk above three to four milligauss. That is the number that belongs in that segment, and it is more than ten times below the reading that had just been dismissed as trivial. I gave them that number myself, on tape, in the interview. Describing my own threshold, I said my comfort level for long-term chronic exposure is three to four milligauss, but preferably one. 2. Six children in thirteen million. The episode reports that these fields might explain one to four percent of childhood leukemias, then reframes it as a German estimate of perhaps six cases among thirteen million children. Torre, to his credit, is uncomfortable. What never gets explained is why that number is small. Almost no children lives above three milligauss in Europe. Fewer than two children in a hundred, in the Italian data. So even if the risk to those children doubles, the number of additional cases across an entire country stays small — not because the hazard is small, but because hardly anyone is exposed to it. Count the whole population and the few who are exposed disappear. And the reason hardly anyone is exposed is that siting rules keep housing away from transmission lines. In Europe, at least. The Dutch government has a standing precautionary policy against building new homes in any zone where the annual average magnetic field exceeds 4 milligauss — the same number the episode never mentioned. Denmark and Norway treat 4 milligauss as the level that triggers a look at mitigation. That is five hundred times below the ICNIRP figure quoted on air. The United States has no federal equivalent. That is evidence of infrastructure siting policy working. It is not evidence that there is no hazard. It is evidence that we already act as though there is one. If you listen to the raw audio you will hear that my proposed solution is EMF exposure is to build better infrastructure. What they left out about the mechanism 3. They accused me of cherry-picking, and then cherry-picked themselves. On air, Zukerman tells Torre that people who worry about electromagnetic fields dismiss the studies showing null results and collect the ones showing harm, and that this is why you have to be careful not to cherry-pick. They had two papers I had rattled off in a hurry, and a second email containing a carefully chosen set. They ran the two weakest, graded them on air, and presented the result as the state of the evidence for not only my theory, but the whole question of oxidative stress from magnetic fields. That is cherry-picking from my emails. The bigger picture is what they did with the literature as a whole. Zukerman acknowledges it exists, dismisses it, and disposes of it in a single stroke. You can go online right now, she tells Torre, and find scores of studies showing these fields increase oxidative stress. The issue, she says, is that they are not studies in people. Many of them are in people. The occupational studies in my second email are in people. That email had been in her inbox for five weeks. She waved off the literature on a factual claim that the documents in her possession contradict. (I have written separately about the evidentiary standard at work here). The effect was that they essentially baited me: ask the subject to supply the evidence, take the weakest thing he sends, and let that stand as a proxy for the whole argument. Wendy has been doing this show for ten years and clearly knows how to extract what she needs for her desired narrative. 4. They presented the collagen-improvement research as a gotcha, but I had already addressed it. The episode treats the existence of studies showing that EMF can improve collagen as a surprise that undercuts me, but I had pre-emptively addressed that five weeks earlier in the email they ignored. Those studies use measured, high-intensity pulsed dosing. The mechanism by which they work is oxidative signalling. The cell reads a controlled rise in reactive oxygen species as a warning, upregulates its antioxidant defenses, mounts a repair response, and the therapy stops before the system is overwhelmed. The key point is that it induces an oxidative response, which means those studies are actually evidence for my proposed mechanism, not against it. A field that produces a therapeutic effect cannot be biologically inert (which is the implication when they say “Nothing happens at 2,000 milligauss). Chronic ambient exposure is the same pathway with no off switch, and it is most consequential during the evening and while sleeping, when the body is in repair mode and the exposure does not stop. Section 5 of my email is titled What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis. I raised the counter-evidence myself, explained why I did not think it refuted the theory, and wrote that I was disappointed the question had not come up in the interview. That is worth holding against the cherry-picking charge in the item above: the studies they presented as inconvenient for me were studies I had gone out of my way to put in front of them. 5. Section 1 of my email stated a critical argument that was never put to the expert directly responsible for it. My email says the exposure limits exist to prevent acute effects and do not address chronic exposure at all, and that my dispute is with the entire framework. Zukerman gestures at this once. After Karipidis gives the 2,000 milligauss figure, she tells Torre that I would object because those levels do not capture “more subtle effects.” That is not my argument, and “subtle” is doing a lot of work here. My argument is that the limits are built to prevent acute effects — nerves firing, muscles twitching, etc — and were not designed to address chronic exposure at all. In fact, ICNIRP’s own documents state as much themselves. Mine is a structural objection to what the standard measures, reduced as a concern about subtlety, it becomes a matter of degree, rather than a categorical difference. They interviewed Ken Karipidis, vice chair of ICNIRP — the body that writes those limits. He was asked what the limit is, but he was never asked how it applies to chronic exposure. The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air 6. They interviewed four officials of the standards body. The episode credits roughly a dozen researchers. Four of them are associated with ICNIRP. Ken Karipidis is the vice chair. Rodney Croft chaired ICNIRP from 2020 to 2024 and led the development of its current guidelines. Dan Baaken is ICNIRP’s scientific secretary. Frank de Vocht sits on the Main Commission. One of them speaks in the episode. Their institution’s position is more than adequately represented — the 2,000 milligauss figure, the safety factors, the assurance that nothing happens below the line. 7. The four who were left out. Dr. Beatrice Golomb is Professor of Medicine at UC San Diego — a physics undergraduate degree, a PhD in biology, an MD. She directs a research group whose stated focus is the relationship between oxidative stress, mitochondrial function and health. That is the mechanism the episode spent its first half dismissing. Her published work includes the fluoroquinolone case series behind the FDA’s black box warning on an antibiotic class that ruptures tendons, where the accepted mechanism is oxidative stress and mitochondrial toxicity — the back half of my chain, already on a drug label. She is in the credits. She is not in the episode. She has told me she finds my theory biologically plausible, and that she has a recording of her interview. Dr. David Carpenter directed the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany for decades and is the most prominent academic voice arguing these fields cause harm. Childhood leukemia is the reason these fields carry a WHO classification at all, and Carpenter is the person you call if you want that case made by someone who has spent a career on it. He is in the credits. He is not in the episode. He has told me that when he was interviewed they could not have been less interested in what he had to say. Dr. Joel Moskowitz directs the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health. He told me directly that they interviewed him and that he thought it went well. He does not appear in the episode, and unlike Golomb and Carpenter, he does not even appear in the credits. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill is the researcher whose work provides the foundation for the oxidative stress mechanism my theory rests on. I gave Rose his email address and phone number. He was never interviewed. They never even called him. 8. “He’s not a scientist.” The episode leans hard on the fact that I am not a credentialed scientist. Zukerman says it. Torre repeats it. “At all.” Having built a segment on that, they then left out the physicist-biologist-physician, the professor of public health, the director of a university environmental health institute, and the McGill researcher whose work the primary mechanism comes from. They spent the episode telling their audience I am not a scientist, and then kept four actual scientists who support the theory off because their argument does not survive otherwise. How they misrepresented me and my case 9. They played my words as a response to an interview I had never heard. Near the end of the hour, Zukerman says she went to me and told me the evidence was lacking. Then she plays me saying I am not wedded to it being an EMF, that I have staked my reputation on it needing more study, and that I am not certain of anything. That segment was placed immediately after Karipidis had finished taking the cherry-picked papers apart. It plays as a man folding under expert scrutiny. Commenters have used it against me since, but it is incorrect. Here is the sequence as it happened. I was interviewed. Karipidis was interviewed weeks later. I was never told what he said, or even who he was. I was never asked to respond to it. I did not know his name until the episode aired. That is not a simple editing decision. That is a quote from one interview, moved to follow a critique from a different interview it was not a response to, so that it would land as a concession. A friend of mine who has spent thirty years as a journalist read that sequence and called it sleazy. She is right. The full passage is reproduced in Appendix A, and it is worth reading. What airs is the preamble. Four paragraphs later I say “to directly answer your question” — and that answer, about what would change my mind if the team relocated, is not in the episode. Neither is the sentence two paragraphs on, where I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. I will say the underlying point again, though, because I meant it and I still do. I am not wedded to my theory that magnetic fields from the substation are contributing to the 49ers injuries. I could be wrong. What I am wedded to is the process of scientific inquiry, and the fact that we should be cautious around these exposures and we need more independently funded studies. 10. Three telling edits. They cut “I’m not a scientist” mid-sentence. What I said: “...and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS...” What aired: “...and that I am not certain of anything. I’m not.” The clip ends on the first two words of the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist, in an episode that spends considerable energy establishing that I am not a scientist. The full sequence is in Appendix A. They cut my own description of my work. Asked what I do, I said I run a wellness business, that I am focused on writing software to help people navigate environmental stressors, that environmental health is my focus, and that I also do independent journalism and research. What aired is the wellness business and the environmental health, with the software and the journalism removed from my own answer. The software engineering does come up later — narrated by them, as a hacker who grew up to write firmware — but my current work, in my own words, arrives as “wellness guy.” Thousands of commercial routers became home Wi-Fi. What I described: working at a wireless networking company surrounded by thousands of Wi-Fi routers, and a stress-induced health collapse afterward that working in that environment contributed to. What aired: Wi-Fi, the kind you have at home — reinforced by a clip of Christian McCaffrey talking about turning his router off at night. Three cuts, and every one of them makes me seem less credible. That is not a coincidence. 11. I gave them my own caveats and the test that would disprove me. In the first email I wrote that a well-designed chronic, ambient-level exposure study in tendon showing no collagen degradation, run over many months, would undercut my confidence in the theory. That is a specific, testable condition, stated in advance and in writing. There was a second interview, weeks later, which was not used in the episode, but in that I asked again for the falsification criterion to be included. What the episode presents instead is a man saying “we need more study,” which reads as a hedge, an open-ended request for the benefit of the doubt. It is the opposite of a hedge. Section 6 of my second email says, unprompted, that as far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human in vivo or in human tendon in a lab. I wrote that because it is true and because it is the first thing anyone should check. Under their standard it becomes the hinge of the entire first half, framed as something they had to surface without my cooperation. I had handed it to them five weeks earlier. And in the interview I said that my 25 to 50 milligauss readings were taken at knee level, and that these fields attenuate quickly, so by the time it reaches your head it is not that high anymore. That did not air either. The qualification arrives later, from Karipidis, as a correction. How you would actually study the injuries 12. They measured the wrong thing. The episode spends its final act on whether the 49ers are the most injured team in the NFL, finds no clean ranking, and lands on “injuries are random”. That is the wrong test. You would define the exposure — measured field levels at the facility — and the outcome narrowly: soft-tissue injuries, not a single MSK injury count that a broken finger and a ruptured Achilles both land in. Then you would compare the 49ers to themselves before and after the exposure changed, and compare that change against every other team over the same window. That controls for league-wide shifts in rules, turf and training load. It is a difference-in-differences design, and it is standard. I sent them that argument on July 28th, in writing, along with the fact that in eleven of the past twelve seasons the 49ers had finished top ten in Adjusted Games Lost. And by the episode’s own reporting, the 49ers are second in games lost to injury over the past decade, with FTN’s Aaron Schatz confirming that once you adjust for starters they come out second worst in the league — after having been one of the healthiest teams for years before that. A finding like that is where an investigation starts, not where it stops. 13. I did a lot of substation research for the episode that was never aired. I had reported that the substation next to the facility was expanded in 2014. That was wrong, and Rose Rimler and I sorted it out together. They gave me credit on air, which I appreciated, but framed it as a concession on my part to something they had found. In fact I had been investigating it myself, was uncertain before they asked, but was waiting for clarification from Silicon Valley Power. The uncertainty centered around a substation named “Esparanca” that was proposed right behind the facilities as part of the stadium construction, but now appears to never have been built. I spent days in Silicon Valley Power’s records, and did eventually reach Silicon Valley Power for confirmation and indentified the mistake myself. I also gave them highly detailed documents on what we do know about those facilities: new equipment installed between 2010 and 2014, and load growth across the system with an inflection around 2013–2014, with the Northern Receiving Station carrying the highest capacity in the system and sitting closest to the data center corridor. None of that is in the episode. I have a separate piece about it coming out soon. *I cut 2 seconds from the raw audio to remove personal information that had no connection to anything in the episode. Appendix A: the passage the clip was taken from This is the sequence from my first interview, in full. The episode uses one fragment of it. It’s tricky because my understanding is that there’s something like a 15-year half-life on collagen remodeling issues. They’re going to get a new crop of players. What I really need, though, is for the injuries to be broken down so we can see the soft tissue injuries. Right now, they’re categorized as MSK injuries, but let’s say we can actually identify them more specifically. Is that right? He was able to do that? Oh, cool. I wasn’t able to find that information. Interesting — I didn’t know that data existed. I tried so hard to get it, and I didn’t know it was available. Maybe you could connect me with that person. That would be amazing. I’m not wedded to it being an EMF, honestly. I’m not. I would say that, to a certain extent, I’ve staked my reputation on the fact that it needs more study. It’s important to look into it, and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, a tendon hypermobility issue. This condition is documented to be partially caused by oxidative stress. I’ve worked with them to mitigate their EMF exposure and have seen people improve. I think it’s a bigger story. In a way, the 49ers represent an occupational cluster with specific exposure risks. If someone would conduct a study on this, I believe we could learn a lot. Perhaps we would discover that it’s like, okay, maybe it’s 10% of the problem. I don’t know the exact number, but I think either way, conducting the study would provide valuable insights. To directly answer your question, it’s challenging for me because it’s part of a bigger story. If the 49ers move and stop having injuries, I might conclude that it was related to the substation. However, if they move and still experience injuries, I would want to analyze the nature of those injuries. Are they primarily soft tissue injuries? I don’t think it’s necessarily a case closed, but the story might lose traction at that point regardless. Three things are worth noting. The aired fragment stops immediately before the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist — the cut described in item 10. It also stops four paragraphs before the words “to directly answer your question.” What the episode plays is the throat-clearing. The actual answer, about what would change my mind, never airs. And two paragraphs in, I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. That is the ranking the episode says I never gave. Appendix B: the full email, July 6th, 1:39 PM Hi Rose, You asked me to send you some studies a couple of weeks ago. I apologize for the delay. I have been incredibly busy. I also wanted to give you a chance to dig in yourself, and get your own perspective before I influenced you too much with mine. That said, I do want to make sure that the actual argument is abundantly clear, so here it is! One note before I begin, there are really two separate questions here: Does the substation cause the soft-tissue injuries? That was my specific claim, and what the podcast is about. Is the theory biologically sound? Can 50/60 Hz fields at these levels do anything biological below the safety limits? Question two is why people have been calling me a conspiracy theorist. The regulatory and advisory bodies (ICNIRP, etc) maintain that anything below their exposure limits is biologically inert, and that position is broadly accepted within the mainstream, but the actual science paints a different picture. To defend my theory I’ve had to defend a much larger claim: that the advisory bodies have the biology wrong. I can’t honestly answer question 1 without first addressing that. Here’s is a simplified outline of my theory, with links to studies: 1. Advisory body thresholds for biological effects The ELF magnetic-field limits (ICNIRP’s ~2,000 mG public / 10,000 mG occupational) exist to prevent acute effects from exposure. If a magnetic field is strong enough, it makes nerves fire and muscles contract. Muscles twitch. You can see faint flashes of light in your vision. People can even feel tingling or even a shock. That happens due to Faraday’s law, which states that a time-varying magnetic field induces an electric field inside the body via the creation of Eddy currents.The standards assume that those currents do nothing below the twitch threshold. They do not consider chronic effects at all. My argument is that they are biologically active and do have chronic effects. 2. There are multipe ELF-EMF mechanisms for inducing oxidative stress. This is basic biophysics. Below are the two primary mechanisms. Simplest first. Dr. Paul Héroux of McGill has the most intuitive explanation, which rests on Maxwell’s principle of superposition: because Maxwell’s equations are linear, two sets of electromagnetic waves sharing the same space simply add together. In the interview I pictured a pebble dropped into a pond, sending out clean ripples. Then a boat motors past at distance, sending larger waves, and where they meet the ripples, the two add together and the original pattern gets distorted. In our cells, the mitochondria run on continuous currents of electrons and protons that carry their own faint electromagnetic fields. An external field from a substation, by the principle of superposition, adds to those internal currents and shifts the pattern. The electron transport chain in the mitochondria leaks a fraction of its electrons by design as reactive oxygen species (ROS), which act as signalling molecules in a healthy cell. Distorting that field increases that electron leakage, creating oxidative stress. A tiny electromagnetic interference results in a large downstream effect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025006474 The more complex pathway is Dimitris Panagopoulos’s Ion Forced-Oscillation / Voltage-Gated Ion Channel (IFO-VGIC) mechanism. Weak, polarized, low-frequency fields force the ions (calcium, potassium, sodium) next to an ion channel’s voltage sensor to oscillate; because that force scales with the inverse cube of the distance involved, fields far below the stimulation threshold can still force the channel open, disrupting the cell’s ion balance and driving ROS overproduction (Nitric oxide and superoxide interact and produce peroxynitrite, a highly unstable cytotoxin that breaks down into free radicals). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366088934 https://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/59/5/92 https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/18/10041 https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1585441/full https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3772193/ 3. Evidence of oxidative stress, in vivo, in humans from ELF-EMF There are many studies, and the strongest are occupational, which applies to the 49ers situation. 115 power-plant workers vs. 145 office controls. Serum malondialdehyde (MDA, the standard lipid-peroxidation marker), superoxide dismutase, and catalase were all significantly higher in the exposed group, and the markers rose with increasing field exposure. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3233/WOR-203244 A follow-up where they reversed the oxidative stress in power plant workers. A double-blind randomized controlled trial: 91 power-plant workers given vitamin E, vitamin C, both, or placebo for 90 days. The antioxidant groups showed reduced lipid peroxidation and raised antioxidant capacity versus controls. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32191586/ A spot-welder study: 46 welders occupationally exposed at 50 Hz, showed significantly altered red-blood-cell antioxidant enzyme activity and concluded ELF-MF “might act as an oxidative stressor… even at the recommended levels of exposure.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18504600/ A substation-specific study found oxidative stress and DNA damage https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24460415/ 4. Oxidative stress degrades collagen This half isn’t controversial at all. Oxidative stress activates the matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) that break collagen down and suppresses its synthesis. Here are three example studies: Siwik et al. 2001: Oxidative stress raises MMPs and lowers collagen synthesis in cardiac fibroblasts. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11121376/ Fisher et al. 2009: Collagen fragmentation drives oxidative stress and elevates MMP-1 in aged human skin. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2631323/ Varani et al. 2006: Decreased collagen production in oxidatively aged skin. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16723701/ 5. What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis I’m glad you asked this question, and I’m bummed we didn’t get to it in the interview because it is a great question, and very important to understand. Superficially it may appear to be a refutation of my theory, but I would argue that it actually supports the underlying argument. That study used a short, high-intensity pulsed dose: therapeutic-PEMF, the same type of field used clinically to stimulate bone and tissue healing. The reason this works is because it triggers the very same biological pathways that can lead to oxidative stress. The exposure still stimulates ROS production, but done at a controlled dosage, for a limited duration it has a different effect. The cell reads the ROS as a warning signal and it upregulates its antioxidant defenses, and mounts a repair/proliferation response. The therapy is then stopped before the cell gets overwhelmed. That is essentially a hormetic response: a small dose of a stressor producing a beneficial adaptation. Two things follow: At the very least, this means the field is biologically active, which by itself undercuts the regulatory claim that these fields are inert below their thresholds. There is a wealth of literature on PEMF (pulsed EMF) bone regeneration and calcium channel signalling (which is the second mechanims in section one). Here is one. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep13856 At best, it leads us straight to my actual concern, which is that under chronic, chaotic and unregulated exposure, the cell’s antioxidant capacity gets overwhelmed, resulting in oxidative stress. There are plentiful examples of things that are beneficial at controlled doses, but harmful at uncontrolled doses. Excecise is one obvious, uncontroversial example. Botox is perhaps a more interesting example. 6. What about a study that shows EMF causing collagen degradation in humans? As far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human, in vivo, or in human tendon in a lab. There are studies involving isolated fibroblasts though, which secrete collagen. The most relevant one showed that human fetal scleral fibroblasts exposed to 50 Hz ELF-EMF showed a significant decrease in collagen synthesis and that MMP-2 expression was upregulated, which is the exact mechanism I described in section 2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3626379/ That’s it! Thanks again for the interview. Best, Peter Anthony Cowan Environmental Health · Wellness Tech · Researcher & Journalist Publisher & Editor, Living Energy Bio: petercowan.comSocial: X · Instagram · TikTokApp: sunlightis.lifePhone: [redacted]