Home – The Conversation

---

• How Indian American spelling bee dominance may fuel educational inequities
• Change won't appear overnight in many states if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade
• Genetic paparazzi are right around the corner, and courts aren't ready to confront the legal quagmire of DNA theft
• Bedbugs' biggest impact may be on mental health after an infestation of these bloodsucking parasites
• What makes smoky, charred barbecue taste so good? The chemistry of cooking over an open flame
• Can Bionic Reading make you a speed reader? Not so fast
• Giving refugees money instead of stuff can lead to price gouging – but it doesn't have to
• US moves to rename Army bases honoring Confederate generals who fought to defend slavery
• Warning signs can be detected sooner through universal screenings for student mental health
• 50 years after ‘Napalm Girl,’ myths distort the reality behind a horrific photo of the Vietnam War and exaggerate its impact
• What 5 previous congressional investigations can teach us about the House Jan. 6 committee hearings
• Qué hay detrás de la escasez de leche de fórmula para bebés en EEUU y cómo asegurarnos de que no se repita
• Future COVID-19 booster shots will likely need fresh formulations as new coronavirus variants of concern continue to emerge
• Teachers often struggle to address mass traumatic events in class
• 5 ways to reduce school shootings
• Supreme Court allows states to use unlawfully gerrymandered congressional maps in the 2022 midterm elections
• Listening to young people could help reduce pandemic-related harms to children
• Should we protect nature for its own sake? For its economic value? Because it makes us happy? Yes
• As the UK celebrates Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee, why will so many Americans also be cheering her on?
• What are digital twins? A pair of computer modeling experts explain
• 'Masked' cancer drug stealthily trains immune system to kill tumors while sparing healthy tissues, reducing treatment side effects
• Modern-day struggle at James Madison's plantation Montpelier to include the descendants' voices of the enslaved
• More student or faculty diversity on campus leads to lower racial gaps in graduation rates
• How the role and visibility of chaplains changed over the past century
• Firearm stocks spike after mass shootings as investors dismiss the chance of tightening gun laws

How Indian American spelling bee dominance may fuel educational inequities Posted: 03 Jun 2022 09:15 AM PDT Harini Logan is embraced by her parents after winning the Scripps National Spelling Bee. Drew Angerer/Getty Images Harini Logan, a cheerful 14-year-old from San Antonio, Texas, made history on June 2, 2022. She became the first Scripps National Spelling Bee champion to win after being eliminated and later reinstated. She was also the first to prevail in a lightning-round tiebreaker with the runner-up. But the fact that she is Indian American – a group that makes up about 1.3% of the U.S. population – is hardly unusual. Over the past 20 years, Indian Americans have come to dominate the Scripps National Spelling Bee – with 21 of the past 23 champions being of South Asian descent. One of the two exceptions was Zaila Avant-garde, also 14. When she won the bee in 2021, she became the Scripps contest's first Black champion from the U.S. The bee was canceled in 2020, but there were eight co-champions in 2019, seven of whom were Indian American. There's even a documentary on this endearing story, "Spelling the Dream." But I contend that the commitment of Indian Americans to these competitions stems partly from perceived hurdles they face in higher education. And I believe that their achievements inadvertently further educational inequalities. The academic track I spent years with Indian American, white and other families engaged in spelling bees, math competitions and other after-school academics while doing research for my book "Hyper Education: Why Good Schools, Good Grades, and Good Behavior Are Not Enough." In one chapter, I explained why Indian Americans have come to dominate bees. I believe that their success has to do with a firm commitment by families to spend the time and money necessary to help their kids fully prepare. These children excel not just in spelling bees but also in geography, math and other academic competitions. Most of my book addresses a more revealing question: why families care about such competitions and advanced academics in the first place and the implications around that. Most U.S. kids participate in activities outside school, usually involving sports, the arts, religious or civic activities. Indian immigrant children do these things too, but many of their parents also make them at least try extracurricular academic activities, especially competitive ones. The more than 100 Indian American parents I interviewed between 2011 and 2018 believed that to have a good shot at getting into a prominent university, their children would need an undeniably strong academic record to compensate for what they saw as weak networks and a lack of college legacy status. Parents also worried that college admission officers might hold their children, as Asian Americans, to a higher standard in expected test scores. "We have to have 130 points above other groups," one father of a spelling contestant said about the SAT college entrance exam. He assured me that tutoring centers and spelling bees would help his daughter get a higher score, an attitude echoed by other parents and children alike. Pursuing after-school education to help their children eventually become more competitive college applicants makes sense to these immigrant parents, given their own upbringing with similar tutoring. I think it's only natural for parents to promote what they are most familiar with, and many of these parents have advanced degrees and grew up with intense academic expectations. In 'Spelling the Dream,' a documentary, viewers see how hard Indian American families work to prepare their children to win bees. A cost of achievement As Indian American children boost their test scores and other academics through studying words, mastering quadratic equations and other intellectual endeavors, they inadvertently contribute to what I see as a troubling trend: the widening educational gaps between higher-income and lower-income families. Achieving in these competitions often requires spending hundreds or even thousands of dollars. Hexco, a publisher specializing in contest preparation, sells word guides and packages of eight coaching sessions that cost US$1,725. According to its website, 94% of spellers who "advanced to the Scripps finals … were Hexco customers" in 2019. Indian Americans have a median household income of $119,000, well above the national median of $85,800. Many of them use this economic edge to advance their children's grades and scores. So, while Indian Americans gravitate toward academic competitions because they worry that otherwise their children will lack equal opportunities, they reinforce educational inequality in the process. This is related to the growing trend of supplemental education by higher-income families generally, which I also studied. The pursuit of after-school education, whether through competitions or tutoring centers, is increasingly common for middle-class families. I'm certain that it's prone to grow even more. Online tutoring alone is expected to grow to an almost $3 billion industry worldwide by 2025. And while the reasons parents pay for and encourage this practice can have something to do with their ethnic backgrounds, one outcome is the same: growing educational inequality. This is an updated version of an article first published on July 20, 2020. Pawan Dhingra does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Change won't appear overnight in many states if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:20 AM PDT Workers at a family planning clinic watch an abortion rights march in Chicago on May 14, 2022. Scott Olson/Getty Images Individual states and some cities are taking legal steps to either limit or allow abortions, gearing up for what will likely be a fierce national battle if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the constitutional right to abortion. The Supreme Court is set to soon release a final verdict on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, one month after a leaked Supreme Court draft majority opinion showed it could reverse Roe v. Wade. But a ruling – likely to come sometime in June or July 2022 – will be only one important step in the ongoing national abortion saga. While 13 states, including Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma, have "trigger laws" that would almost immediately restrict abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned, the legal future for abortion in 10 states is uncertain. As a professor of health law, public health law and medical ethics, I think it is important to understand that it may take time to see the full effects of a Supreme Court decision at the state level. Many states have laws regulating abortion already in place, while other states are moving to expand or restrict abortions. Oklahoma, for example, approved a new law on May 26, 2022, that bans most abortions after a fetus' heartbeat can be detected – usually around six weeks after conception. The only exceptions are cases of reported rape or incest, or a need to save the pregnant woman's life. In Austin, Texas, lawmakers are working to pass a law that would decriminalize abortion within city limits. Towns in Nebraska and elsewhere have also approved local regulations that ban abortion. While state laws can override these rules, local ordinances can still limit where abortion clinics can operate. It's key to keep in mind, though, the legal process at the state level can involve not only the legislature, but courts and state governors, which creates a complex and sometimes unpredictable outcome that could take months or years to resolve. What's at stake The Supreme Court is currently reviewing Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a case that considers a Mississippi law called the Mississippi Gestational Age Act. This 2018 law prohibits most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with medical emergencies or fetal anomaly as exceptions. The Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade in 1973, establishing that women have a right to get an abortion before a fetus could survive outside of its mother's womb – typically around 24 weeks of pregnancy. After this time, states could choose to restrict abortion – as long as there were exceptions to preserve the life or health of a pregnant woman. State-by-state decisions Now, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the Mississippi law and overturns Roe v. Wade, states would regain power to regulate abortion. This would result in a new patchwork of state laws across the U.S. that would take time to be approved and implemented. State legislatures may review old state abortion laws that predate Roe v. Wade, for example. State Supreme Courts could also review existing or new laws on abortion. There's already been a growing gap on this issue across states. In 2018, many states began passing new laws to either make it harder or easier to get an abortion. States may restrict abortion access Many states are now working to not entirely ban abortion, but rather to change the point at which someone can get an abortion during pregnancy. Currently, only three states – Alabama, Arkansas and South Dakota – plan to entirely ban abortions, with the exception of a medical emergency. The picture is more nuanced in different states. Some states have trigger laws that would make it illegal for someone to perform an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Texas already enacted a law in 2021 that makes it illegal for someone to perform an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Legislators in other states, like Arizona and Florida, also recently approved laws that restrict abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Some federal courts have challenged these kinds of restrictions. In over a dozen states, including Kentucky, a federal court blocked state laws in April 2022 that restricted when someone can get an abortion. But overturning Roe v. Wade could allow these laws to take effect, or could produce more legal battles to block the law or revise it. Every state would still permit exceptions, such as for medically necessary abortions or health emergencies. Each state's exception would differ slightly. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to soon release its decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Drew Angerer/Getty Images States may expand abortion access An estimated 21 states, though, would continue to have few limitations on getting abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. There is also growing momentum for some states to make it easier to get an abortion, by allocating taxpayer funding for abortion services, for example, or mandating insurance coverage with no additional cost. In recent years some states, such as Maine, Illinois and Virginia, have changed their laws to allow medical professionals who are not doctors, like nurses, to perform surgical abortions. Eight states, including California, New York and Washington, have laws that guarantee the right to get an abortion. Seven states, including Colorado, Oregon and Vermont, have no limits on when a pregnant woman can get an abortion. Some states, meanwhile, have state abortion laws predating Roe v. Wade that they may to revisit. Michigan, for example, has a 1931 law that makes providing an abortion a felony, unless it is done to protect the life of the pregnant person. A Michigan court blocked enforcing this law on May 17, 2022, even if the court overturns Roe v. Wade. This means the Michigan Legislature may revise the state law, which could take months. If the Supreme Court indeed throws the question of abortion back to states, the outcome of Dobbs v. Jackson could be the starting point for states to navigate a wide range of new abortion laws. Katherine Drabiak does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Genetic paparazzi are right around the corner, and courts aren't ready to confront the legal quagmire of DNA theft Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:20 AM PDT DNA is a trove of personal information that can be hard to keep track of and protect. Boris Zhitkov/Moment via Getty Images Every so often stories of genetic theft, or extreme precautions taken to avoid it, make headline news. So it was with a picture of French President Emmanuel Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin sitting at opposite ends of a very long table after Macron declined to take a Russian PCR COVID-19 test. Many speculated that Macron refused due to security concerns that the Russians would take and use his DNA for nefarious purposes. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz similarly refused to take a Russian PCR COVID-19 test. While these concerns may seem relatively new, pop star celebrity Madonna has been raising alarm bells about the potential for nonconsensual, surreptitious collection and testing of DNA for over a decade. She has hired cleaning crews to sterilize her dressing rooms after concerts and requires her own new toilet seats at each stop of her tours. At first, Madonna was ridiculed for having DNA paranoia. But as more advanced, faster and cheaper genetic technologies have reached the consumer realm, these concerns seem not only reasonable, but justified. For some, keeping one's distance might be a preferable alternative to getting one's DNA stolen. AP Photo/Pool Sputnik Kremlin We are law professors who study how emerging technologies like genetic sequencing are regulated. We believe that growing public interest in genetics has increased the likelihood that genetic paparazzi with DNA collection kits may soon become as ubiquitous as ones with cameras. While courts have for the most part managed to evade dealing with the complexities of surreptitious DNA collection and testing of public figures, they won't be able to avoid dealing with it for much longer. And when they do, they are going to run squarely into the limitations of existing legal frameworks when it comes to genetics. Genetic information troves You leave your DNA behind you everywhere you go. The strands of hair, fingernails, dead skin and saliva you shed as you move through your day are all collectible trails of DNA. Genetic analysis can reveal not only personal information, such as existing health conditions or risk for developing certain diseases, but also core aspects of a person's identity, such as their ancestry and the potential traits of their future children. In addition, as genetic technologies continue to evolve, fears about using surreptitiously collected genetic material for reproductive purposes via in vitro gametogenesis become more than just paranoia. In vitro gametogenesis (IVG), while still in development, could allow prospective parents to create egg or sperm from other parts of the body, like skin. Ultimately, taking an individaul's genetic material and information without their consent is an intrusion into a legal domain that is still considered deeply personal. Despite this, there are few laws protecting the interests of individuals regarding their genetic material and information. Existing legal frameworks When disputes involving genetic theft from public figures inevitably reach the courtroom, judges will need to confront fundamental questions about how genetics relates to personhood and identity, property, health and disease, intellectual property and reproductive rights. Such questions have already been raised in cases involving the use of genetics in law enforcement, the patentability of DNA and ownership of discarded genetic materials. In each of these cases, courts focused on only one dimension of genetics, such as privacy rights or the value of genetic information for biomedical research. But this limited approach disregards other aspects, such as the privacy of family members with shared genetics, or property and identity interests someone may have in genetic material discarded as part of a medical procedure. In the case of genetic paparazzi, courts will presumably try to fit complex questions about genetics into the legal framework of privacy rights because this is how they have approached other intrusions into the lives of public figures in the past. Modern U.S. privacy law is a complex web of state and federal regulations governing how information can be acquired, accessed, stored and used. The right to privacy is limited by First Amendment protections on the freedom of speech and press, as well as Fourth Amendment prohibitions on unreasonable searches and seizure. Public figures face further restrictions on their privacy rights because they are objects of legitimate public interest. On the other hand, they also have publicity rights that control the commercial value of their unique personally identifying traits. People whose genetic material has been taken without their consent may also raise a claim of conversion that their property has been interfered with and lost. Courts in Florida are currently considering a conversion claim in a private dispute where the former CEO of Marvel Entertainment and his wife accused a millionaire businessman of stealing their DNA to prove that they were slandering him through a hate-mail campaign. This approach replaces the narrow legal framework of privacy with an even narrower framework of property, reducing genetics to an object that someone possesses. What the future may hold Under existing laws and the current state of genetic technology, most people don't need to worry about surreptitious collection and use of genetic material in the way that public figures might. But genetic paparazzi cases will likely play an important role in determining what rights everyone else will or will not have. As DNA testing technology advances, questions about genetic privacy and ownership will only become more complex. Eric Baradat/AFP via Getty Images The U.S. Supreme Court is very unlikely to recognize new rights, or even affirm previously recognized rights, that are not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. Therefore, at least at the federal level, individual protections for genetic material and information are not likely to adapt to changing times. This means that cases involving genetics are likely to fall within the purview of state legislatures and courts. But none of the states have adequately grappled with the complexities of genetic legal claims. Even in states with laws specifically designed to protect genetic privacy, regulations cover only a narrow range of genetic interests. Some laws, for example, may prohibit disclosure of genetic information, but not collection. For better or for worse, how the courts rule in genetic paparazzi cases will shape how society thinks about genetic privacy and about individual rights regarding genetics more broadly. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Bedbugs' biggest impact may be on mental health after an infestation of these bloodsucking parasites Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:17 AM PDT Dozens of bedbugs and their eggs and fecal material on a metal bed frame. Jerome Goddard Bedbugs are back with a vengeance. After an absence of around 70 years, thanks to effective pesticides such as DDT, they've been popping up in fancy hotels, spas, department stores, subway trains, movie theaters – and, of course, people's homes. I'm a public health entomologist. In the course of my work, I've studied these little bloodsuckers, even letting bedbugs feast on my own appendages in the name of science. No one likes dealing with bedbugs – and there are ways to minimize your chances of needing to. Colorized scanning electron microscopic image reveals the underside of a bedbug, including the proboscis (purple) and two eyes (red). CDC/Janice Haney Carr, CC BY Know thy bedbug enemy The common bedbug, Cimex lectularius, has been a parasite of humans for thousands of years. Historically, these tiny bloodsuckers were common in human dwellings worldwide, giving the old saying "sleep tight, don't let the bedbugs bite" real meaning. They had nearly disappeared in developing countries until the mid-1990s, when they began making a comeback because of restriction or loss of certain pesticides, changes in pest control practices and increased international travel. In many areas around the world, they are now a major urban pest. A bedbug extends its beaklike proboscis to feed on human blood. Jerome Goddard Adult bedbugs are less than a quarter-inch long (about 5 mm), oval-shaped and flattened, resembling unfed ticks or small cockroaches. Tucked backward underneath their head they have a long proboscis – a tubular mouthpart they can extend to take a blood meal. A bedbug needs only between three and 10 minutes to consume up to six times its weight in blood in a single meal. A yellowish-white first-stage bedbug nymph is tiny. Jerome Goddard Adults are reddish brown, while the babies are extremely tiny and yellowish-white in color. They hide in cracks and crevices, generally within a few feet of a bed, coming out only to feed on an unsuspecting host. Then they run back to their hiding places, where they mate and lay eggs. Houses can become infested with thousands of the little bloodthirsty pests in the mattress and box spring, where they leave telltale black fecal spots. In severe infestations there may be thick feces, hundreds of shed skins and eggs several millimeters thick. Biggest health impacts may be psychological Bedbugs have been suspected in the transmission of more than 40 disease organisms, but there is little evidence bedbugs transmit human pathogens, with the possible exception of the microorganism that causes Chagas disease. Extreme infestations can, in rare cases, lead to blood loss severe enough to cause anemia. Their principal medical impacts are related to nuisance biting and the associated itching and inflammation. The most common bite reactions are itchy red spots at feeding sites that usually go away in a week or so. Some people have complex skin reactions, including hives and blisters, or allergic responses. The marks from bedbug bites can persist on human skin for several days. Jerome Goddard and Kristine T. Edwards Then there's bedbugs' emotional and psychological effects on their victims. Run-ins with these parasites can trigger nervousness, anxiety and insomnia. Bedbugs commonly come with a side effect of constant worrying and feelings of shame. One distressed Canadian expressed it this way: "To be honest, until you go through [an infestation], you have no idea just how horrifying it really is. It is just natural for you to become paranoid; you lose sleep, you end up dreaming and thinking about bedbugs – they just consume every fiber of your being." One study of people exposed to bedbugs found about half reported sleep difficulties and social isolation associated with the infestation. My colleague and I analyzed 135 internet posts concerning bedbug infestations. The majority, 81% of the posts, reported three or more behaviors commonly associated with post-traumatic stress disorder – reactions like reexperiencing the event through intrusive memories and nightmares, startle responses and hypervigilance. Six posts detailed intense and repeated cleanings of homes or offices. Five posts reported persistent avoidance of people, activities and places that might lead to transmission of insects or arouse recollections of the original encounter. And five posts detailed suicidal thoughts or attempts. There are other anecdotal reports of suicides or drug overdoses by people struggling with bedbugs. You can check for the telltale marks of a bedbug infestation on a bed's mattress and box spring. H.J. Harlan, U.S. Armed Forces Pest Management Board, CC BY How to protect yourself from bedbugs Not every hotel room has bedbugs, but some do. Simple precautions can help protect you and your belongings from infestation. Leave all unnecessary items in your vehicle, such as extra clothing, gear and equipment. When first entering your hotel room, place luggage in the bathroom until you have had a chance to inspect the place. Pull back sheets and check the mattress and box spring for live bedbugs or black fecal spots. If any bugs or suspicious signs of infestation are found, go to the front desk and request another room. Because bedbugs don't usually travel far on their own, other nonadjacent rooms may be perfectly clean of the parasites. Keeping bedbugs out of houses and apartments can be difficult, especially if you travel a lot. After traveling, unpack luggage outside or in the garage, and wash all clothing from the luggage in hot water and dry on high heat if possible. A dryer is a great tool in the fight against bedbugs. Bedbugs can also hitch a ride into your home on used furniture or items purchased at secondhand stores or garage sales. Be sure to disinfect – more precisely "dis-insect" – those kinds of items. It's a good idea to never purchase used mattresses or beds, no matter how good a bargain. What can you do if you are forced to confront these bloodsuckers? A bedbug infestation found in a hotel room should immediately be reported to management. If you find bedbugs in your house or apartment, or in secondhand purchases, it's best not to try to spray them yourself with over-the-counter pesticides. My recommendation is to contact a competent pest exterminator, who will treat the space with pesticides, use complex heat systems or both to kill the bugs. Try not to panic. Keep in mind that bedbugs are only insects. They're not magic. Believe me, they can be killed and eliminated from a dwelling. Jerome Goddard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

What makes smoky, charred barbecue taste so good? The chemistry of cooking over an open flame Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:17 AM PDT Cooking food over an open flame produces unique flavors thanks to some interesting chemistry. Lars Szatmari / EyeEm via Getty Images The mere thought of barbecue's smokey scents and intoxicating flavors is enough to get most mouths watering. Summer is here, and that means it is barbecue season for many people in the U.S. I am a chemist who studies compounds found in nature, and I am also a lover of food – including barbecue. Cooking on a grill may seem simple, but there is a lot of chemistry that sets barbecue apart from other cooking methods and results in such a delicious experience. Cooking over an open flame – whether from gas, wood or charcoal – allows you to use both radiant and conductive heat to cook food. Romary/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA Cooking with fire First, it is important to define barbecue because the term can mean different things in different cultures or geographic locations. At its most basic, barbecue is the cooking of food over an open flame. What sets barbecue apart from other cooking methods is how heat reaches the food. On a barbecue, the hot grill grates heat the food via direct contact through a process known as conduction. The food also warms and cooks by absorbing radiation directly from the flames below. The mix of heating methods allows you to sear the parts of the food touching the grill while simultaneously cooking the parts that aren't touching the griddle – like the sides and top – through radiating heat. The resulting range of temperatures creates a complex mixture of flavors and aromas. When cooking on a stovetop, there is much less radiation and most of the cooking is done where the food is in direct contact with the pan. When barbecuing, you can either put the food directly above the flames – what is called direct heat – or farther away on indirect heat. The direct cooking method subjects the food to very high temperatures, as the grilling surface can be anywhere from 500 to 700 degrees Fahrenheit (260 to 371 Celsius). The indirect cooking method places the heat source to the side of the food or far below, exposing the food to temperatures around 200 to 300 F (93 to 149 C). Cooking is the process of using high temperatures to drive chemical reactions that change food at a molecular level. When you cook meat at higher temperatures – like over direct heat on a barbecue – the first thing to happen is that water near the meat's surface boils off. Once the surface is dry, the heat causes the proteins and sugars on the outside of the meat to undergo a reaction called the Maillard Reaction. This reaction produces a complex mixture of molecules that make food taste more savory or "meaty" and adds depth to scents and flavors. The reaction and the flavors it produces are influenced by many variables, including temperature and acidity as well as the ingredients within any sauces, rubs or marinades. A similar process occurs with vegetables. Barbecuing allows the water to evaporate or drip down without getting trapped by a pan. This keeps the vegetables from becoming soggy and promotes caramelization reactions. These reactions turn carbohydrates and sugars into smaller compounds like maltol – which has a toasty flavor – and furan – which tastes nutty, meaty and caramel-like. It's much easier to control the level of charring on food when cooking on a barbecue. Lablascovegmenu/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY Char and crisp Another hallmark of barbecued food is the unique char it develops. When foods are exposed to heat for prolonged periods of time, non-carbon atoms in the food break down, leaving behind the crispy, black carbon. This is the process of burning or charring. Almost no one likes a completely burnt piece of meat, but little splashes of crispy char flavor can add such depth to foods. Cooking over the direct heat of a barbecue allows you to add just the amount of char to match your taste. Unfortunately for those who like a little extra crisp, some of the chemicals in charred meat – molecules called heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons – are known carcinogens. Though the dangers are far lower than smoking cigarettes, for example, limiting the amount of charring on meats can help reduce the risk of developing cancer. Smoke gives barbecued foods much of their unique flavor. Harry Knight/Unsplash Photos Smokey flavors The final quintessential barbecue flavor is smokiness. Cooking over wood or charcoal involves a lot of smoke. Even on a gas grill, melting fats will drip onto the heat source and produce smoke. As smoke swirls around the barbecue, the food will absorb its flavors. Smoke is made up of gases, water vapor and small solid particles from the fuel. Burning wood breaks down molecules called lignans, and these turn into smaller organic molecules – including syringol and guaiacol – that are mainly responsible for the quintessential smokey flavor. When smoke comes in contact with food, the components of the smoke can get absorbed. Food is particularly good at taking on smokey flavors because it contains both fats and water. Each binds to different types of molecules. In chemistry terms, fats are non-polar – meaning they have a weak electric charge – and easily grab other non-polar molecules. Water is polar – meaning it has areas of positive charge and an area of negative charge similar to a magnet – and is good at binding to other polar molecules. Some foods are better at absorbing smokey flavors than others, depending on their composition. One way to use chemistry to make food more smokey is to periodically spray it with water during the barbecuing process. Smoke can contain hundreds of possible carcinogens depending on what you are burning. Only a small amount of research has been done on whether grilled foods absorb enough smoke to pose a significant risk to health. But researchers know that inhaling smoke is strongly correlated with cancer. While the idea of barbecuing your favorite dish may evoke the feeling of simple pleasures, the science behind it is quite complex. The next time you enjoy the smoky goodness of food from a grill, you will hopefully appreciate the diverse nature of the compounds and reactions that helped produce it. Kristine Nolin ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

Can Bionic Reading make you a speed reader? Not so fast Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:16 AM PDT In an age of distraction, the desire to read faster and more efficiently is understandable. eclipse_images/Getty Images What if something as simple as bolding parts of a word could make reading a breeze, improving your focus, speed and comprehension? That's the claim made by the creators of Bionic Reading, an app that revises texts so that the most concise parts of the words are "highlighted." Doing so, according to the makers of the app, directs the eyes to focus on the important parts of the text. Because "your brain reads faster than your eye," this allows users to read more quickly and efficiently. Early adopters have raved about the app on social media – including some users with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dyslexia. But as an educational psychologist who researches reading in print and digital mediums, I think the hype is overblown – if not misleading. Shaky claims On the Bionic Reading website, the inventor, a typographer named Renato Casutt, explains that Bionic Reading was tested independently using 12 participants. He adds that it wasn't explicitly tested on people with dyslexia. He then goes on to write that "the results are unclear." From there, Casutt says Bionic Reading had a positive effect for most participants, but that others found it "disturbing." These tests don't adhere to standard scientific practices. A sample size of 12 is extraordinary small, and it is highly unlikely it would make it past an editor's desk for peer review at a reputable journal. Casutt doesn't tell readers what the "positive effect" refers to. Was it reading time? Comprehension? Enjoyment? The Conversation reached out to Bionic Reading for more clarity and to better understand its methodology. The company did not respond. The company website's assertion that the "brain reads faster than the eye" is also deeply flawed. Perhaps it's a reference to sight words: When someone learns how to read, they normally have many words that they can make sense of via simple recognition, rather than by breaking down the word into individual syllables or sounds. These sight words often appear at a higher frequency in texts at all reading levels. Either way, what makes reading "slow" is not due to an inability to quickly perceive the words themselves – which is what Bionic Reading claims to fix. Instead, reading takes the time it does due to language processing, which is where our brains turn strings of letters into words and a series of words into meaning. So no matter how quickly you recognize certain words, your brain still has to do the work to understand the sentence. Speed at a cost This isn't the first time someone has tried to introduce ways to read text more quickly. In fact, educators used to teach speed reading in the 1980s. However, that method faded from curriculums as research showed that faster isn't always better – nor do the techniques even lead to faster reading in most cases. Bionic Reading may even hinder readers. Consider the speed-accuracy trade-off, which theorizes that the more quickly one does something, the worse their performance. My colleagues and I tested this theory for reading comprehension across print and digital mediums. We found, time after time, whether in print or on a screen, the faster someone read a text, the less likely they were to comprehend it. When people read quickly, they interact with the text on a more superficial level, often skipping over entire sentences or paragraphs and failing to reread important parts of the text. Tried and true techniques To help struggling readers, especially those with dyslexia and ADHD, research suggests that one of the most helpful tools can be to simply encourage reading more slowly. This is the antithesis of Bionic Reading's argument. However, unlike Bionic Reading, the "read more slowly" school of thought has decades of research supporting it. Other simple steps, such as following along with your finger or computer mouse, can be helpful for those with reading difficulties, too. I can understand the allure of Bionic Reading. Information bombards us. Sources of distraction are rampant. But reading proficiency scores were dropping to new lows even before the pandemic. Now is not the time to be valuing speed at the cost of comprehension. Lauren M. Singer Trakhman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Giving refugees money instead of stuff can lead to price gouging – but it doesn't have to Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:15 AM PDT When refugees get money, it can stimulate the local economy. Angelos Tzortzinis/AFP via Getty Images Refugees increasingly receive money from humanitarian agencies and organizations, instead of food, clothing and other items shipped from afar. This approach is intended to let refugees get more of what they need while also boosting local businesses. But because local retailers sometimes respond to higher demand brought about by an influx of money by raising their prices, the emphasis on cash assistance can hurt both local residents and refugees – especially those who live in camps. And yet we've determined that it's possible for humanitarian organizations to give refugees cash without stoking inflation nearby. Refugees have been staying in the Katsikas camp in Greece for years. Telesilla O. Kotsi, CC BY-ND Calibrating prices This would be possible through a new system we are calling "price-dependent cash assistance." We propose that humanitarian organizations increase cash assistance to reward local retailers when they reduce prices. We also support decreasing or terminating that aid to punish retailers who take advantage of the situation by raising prices. Because local governments like to see more cash being brought into the local economies, we are suggesting that local governments monitor the prices of basic necessities and report what they see to humanitarian agencies and organizations. One of us interviewed humanitarian organizations, retailers, suppliers and local authorities and collected data at refugee camps in Greece. Based on our extensive analysis of that information, we are proposing a new way for humanitarian organizations to decide on the right mix of money and goods to distribute to refugees. This new mechanism would put more money in refugees' hands as long as retailers keep their prices low. Instead of having a motive to raise their prices and profit from the cash assistance refugees get, local retailers would have an incentive to reduce their prices. As a result, refugees could enjoy lower prices and the flexibility to use aid money as they see fit without disrupting the local economy. We believe that refugees, retailers and local residents would all be better off this way. Refugees staying in camps will often spend most of the money they get as cash assistance in small markets like this one. Telesilla O. Kotsi, CC BY-ND More refugees and more cash This problem is important to resolve because there are more than 80 million people forcibly displaced worldwide, according to estimates made in 2021 before Russia invaded Ukraine, which sent another 6.6 million people abroad. About 27 million of the 80 million displaced were refugees, including large numbers from Syria, Venezuela, Afghanistan, South Sudan and Myanmar. And about 40% of those refugees were living in camps or rural areas, according to United Nations estimates. Humanitarian organizations such as Oxfam and Mercy Corps used to provide refugees with only food, clothing and other items known as in-kind assistance. As of 2014, those goods accounted for 94% of the humanitarian assistance worldwide, with the remaining 6% delivered as money. By 2019, cash assistance increased to almost 18% of the humanitarian aid. These groups, as well as government-run international agencies like the World Food Program, are distributing more cash. The approach we propose provides more flexibility and can, through purchasing power, help restore refugees' dignity. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

US moves to rename Army bases honoring Confederate generals who fought to defend slavery Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:14 AM PDT Named after Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg, Fort Bragg, outside Fayetteville, N.C., is one of the U.S. bases under consideration for a name change. Logan Mock-Bunting/Getty Images For decades, nine U.S. Army bases have carried the names of men who fought against the U.S. Army – in a war waged to defend and perpetuate the slavery of people of African descent. These military installations, all in Southern states, were named to honor such figures as Gen. Robert E. Lee, who commanded the Confederate Army; John Bell Hood, an associate of Lee's known for being both brave and impetuous; and Leonidas Polk, an Episcopal bishop who, thanks to his friendship with Jefferson Davis, began the war as a major general. All three enslaved Black people. Created by Congress in 2021 to recommend names that exemplify modern day U.S. military and national values, a federal panel took a major step on May 24, 2022, toward removing this remnant of "lost cause" ideology. That ideology is the discredited notion that the Confederacy's rebellion was an honorable struggle for the Southern way of life and that what Confederates viewed as the "war of northern aggression" was over states' rights, not slavery. What the government called the Naming Commission proposed rechristening nine of the Confederate-themed bases, mostly after men and women of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds – people who "would be inspirational to the soldiers and civilians who serve on our Army posts, and to the communities who support them." For example, Fort Lee in Virginia would become Fort Gregg-Adams in honor of Lt. Gen. Arthur Gregg and Lt. Col. Charity Adams, African Americans who excelled at logistics and other military support functions during World War II. Fort Hood in Texas would become Fort Cavazos, commemorating Richard Cavazos, who received the Purple Heart and other awards for valor in Vietnam and became the first Latino to reach the rank of general. And Fort Polk in Louisiana would become Fort Johnson in recognition of Sgt. William Henry Johnson, who was posthumously awarded the Purple Heart in 1996 and the Medal of Honor in 2015 for heroism during World War I. As a Black man in the Jim Crow era, Johnson was denied those honors during his military service. "We wanted names and values that underpin the core responsibility of the military, to defend the Constitution of the United States," said Michelle Howard, a retired Navy admiral who chairs the commission. Unquestioned for too long Four of the bases had been named for Confederate leaders at the start of World War I, and the others at the start of World War II. Until recently, the military installations honoring Confederate leaders received little scrutiny from the media. As a newspaper reporter four decades ago, I gave the names a free pass. In 1981, I covered the Boy Scouts Jamboree at Fort A.P. Hill in Virginia without mentioning that the base was named for a man who had turned against the United States and fought to defend slavery. Movement to rename the bases In recent years, more Americans, including those living in the South, have reconsidered the use of Confederate iconography. Such concerns escalated in 2015 after Dylann Roof, a self-avowed white supremacist, shot and killed nine Black people during a Bible study at a church in Charleston, South Carolina. Investigators later found a website registered in the name of Roof containing images of Roof posing with the Confederate battle flag. The issue gained momentum in the U.S. Congress after the George Floyd protests in 2020, when many communities started taking down statues and renaming buildings that honored Confederate figures. Congress included the creation of the Naming Commission in the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. Then-President Donald Trump vetoed the bill, but Congress overrode the veto. Coming up with new names The Naming Commission received more than 34,000 suggestions from the public for new base names. "Every name either originated from or resonated with the local communities," said Ty Seidule, a retired Army general and the panel's vice chair. Full-length portrait of Mary Edwards Walker, 1832-1919, American physician and advocate of women's rights. Mathew Brady/Getty Images In addition to the previously mentioned names, the commission proposed renaming bases for: Lt. Gen. Hal Moore, who served in Vietnam and other assignments, and his wife, Julia Moore, who has been an advocate for military families and reformed the military's death notice procedures. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower. Dr. Mary Walker, the Army's first female surgeon, who received the Medal of Honor for her service during the Civil War. Sgt. Van Barfoot, a Choctaw Indian who served in World War II, Korea and Vietnam. Michael Novosel Sr., a pilot who volunteered in his 40s to fight in Vietnam and subsequently rescued his son, who had been shot down and was stranded near the enemy. Novosel's selection recognizes "generational service," the panel said. The commission also proposed renaming Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as Fort Liberty. Congress and the U.S. secretary of defense still must sign off on the new names. But people like Troy Mosley, who for years has pushed to erase the Confederate names, is encouraged. Mosley, who formed a group called Citizens Against Intolerance, said the commission "did a fantastic job selecting name replacements from the rich tapestry of diverse and distinguished military service." To people who have anguished over the prevalence of Confederate symbols in the U.S., the commission's proposals are long overdue. Jeff South does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Warning signs can be detected sooner through universal screenings for student mental health Posted: 03 Jun 2022 05:14 AM PDT Students may self-report distress when given the opportunity. Anna Kraynova / EyeEm / Getty Images Whenever a massacre takes place at a U.S. school, like the one at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, discussions often follow about whether school officials may have missed any "red flags." As a researcher who specializes in supporting student mental health, I believe these discussions are overlooking important issues. To prevent school violence, the discussion must shift. Rather than what schools missed, the emphasis should be placed on how schools can be more proactive about identifying students with mental health needs before they display signs of distress. Ideally, schools should be the one setting in which all youths have consistent access to caring adults. A typical elementary school teacher will spend more than 1,000 hours with students per school year and thus are in an ideal position to recognize behavioral and emotional changes in students. However, teachers rarely receive training in mental and behavioral health, which makes them more likely to focus on student behaviors that disrupt instruction, such as aggression and talking out of turn. It is little surprise that sending kids to the office – known in the field as an office discipline referral – continues to be a primary mechanism for identifying students in need of emotional, behavioral and mental health supports. Challenges to being more proactive Increasingly, schools have adopted a framework known as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, a proactive system meant to teach essential social skills and prevent later behavior problems. The system is meant to create a positive school environment through support at the school, classroom and individual levels. This includes setting schoolwide expectations for behavior and helping teachers with classroom management. Rather than being punished for bad behavior, students are recognized for positive behavior. However, even in schools that use Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, the reactive approach of using data about how often kids are sent to the office is still used. A problematic approach Why are discipline referrals a problem? Consider a typical referral process. Research has consistently shown that Hispanic and African American male students are sent to the office at a disproportionate rate. Behaviors that are disruptive to instruction, such as talking out of turn, are more likely to lead to referrals, while students with more quiet and internal concerns, such as anxiety or stress, are often overlooked. Discipline referrals are unreliable and rarely provide information on how schools can help students. Many school safety plans have focused on physical security measures, such as metal detectors and armed school resource officers. However, a comprehensive and effective safety plan includes physical and psychological safety. Since 2012, I have been researching universal screening tools as a way to proactively identify students in need of emotional or mental health support. A universal screening tool is a brief assessment that usually takes less than two minutes to complete and measures early indicators of social, behavioral and emotional needs. For instance, an assessment might ask teachers how frequently a student engages in arguing and impulsive behavior or is sad. Students are asked the same or similar questions about themselves. A teacher may complete a screening tool on each student in the classroom in less than 30 minutes for the whole class. These tools are not diagnostic but rather show general areas where a student may benefit from help, such as emotional coping skills and anger management. Early detection Research from my colleagues and me over the past decade has consistently found that screening tools accurately detect students in need of additional support in school. Evidence shows they work across a wide age range and help determine what kind of intervention is needed. Research has found these screening tools show that students who self-report as being at risk are likely to have poor grades and lower test scores on statewide tests. My colleague Stephen Kilgus, an associate professor of school psychology, and I developed the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Scale – also known as SAEBRS – which has been used in rural, suburban and urban school districts across the United States. Increasing use Nearly a quarter of U.S. schools now use some type of systematic tool to evaluate the mental and emotional health of students. This is up from approximately 13% in 2014. And yet the majority of schools do not use these sorts of proactive tools. Administrators cite costs, time and lack of school mental health professionals as barriers to using screening tools. Despite the costs of time and money, these screening tools can pay off in the long run. Ultimately, screening tools connected to prevention systems may reduce significant behavior concerns by up to 50% and suspensions by 22%. This results in substantial time and cost savings. To begin, screening plans should include who completes the screening tool. Having both teacher and student perspectives is essential. New research has demonstrated the benefit of multiple raters. Students as young as kindergartners can use the tools to report mental health needs when the tools, which feature child-friendly language. In supporting a number of local schools, we have found that teachers reported 40% of students in need of support, while 70% of students self-reported being in need of support. Student voice is a critical component in communicating mental health needs. In December 2021, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy reported that the pandemic has worsened the nation's youth mental health crisis. As our society continues to grapple with mass school shootings, schools must play a critical role in preventing future tragedies. Effective prevention requires proactive assessment. Universal screenings have proved themselves effective in promoting student well-being. The question is whether schools will use them. Nathaniel von der Embse, Ph.D., NCSP is a Professor of School Psychology at the University of South Florida, co-director of the School Mental Health Collaborative, and consults with Illuminate Education. He has received funding from the Spencer Foundation, US Department of Education, National Institute for Justice.

50 years after ‘Napalm Girl,’ myths distort the reality behind a horrific photo of the Vietnam War and exaggerate its impact Posted: 02 Jun 2022 12:06 PM PDT Terrified children, including 9-year-old Kim Phuc, center, near Trang Bang, Vietnam, after a South Vietnamese plane on June 8, 1972, accidentally dropped its flaming napalm on its own troops and civilians. AP Photo/Nick Ut, File The "Napalm Girl" photograph of terror-stricken Vietnamese children fleeing an errant aerial attack on their village, taken 50 years ago this month, has rightly been called "a picture that doesn't rest." It is one of those exceptional visual artifacts that draws attention and even controversy years after it was made. In May 2022, for example, Nick Ut, the photographer who captured the image, and the photo's central figure, Phan Thi Kim Phuc, made news at the Vatican as they presented a poster-size reproduction of the prize-winning image to Pope Francis, who has emphasized the evils of warfare. In 2016, Facebook stirred controversy by deleting "Napalm Girl" from a commentary posted at the network because the photograph shows the then-9-year-old Kim Phuc entirely naked. She had torn away her burning clothes as she and other terrified children ran from their village, Trang Bang, on June 8, 1972. Facebook retracted the decision amid an international uproar about the social network's free speech policies. Such episodes signal how "Napalm Girl" is much more than powerful evidence of war's indiscriminate effects on civilians. The Pulitzer Prize-winning image, formally known as "The Terror of War," has also given rise to tenacious media-driven myths. Phan Thi Kim Phuc, left, is visited by AP photographer Nick Ut in 1973. After taking the photograph of her fleeing in agony in 1972, Ut transported her to a hospital. AP photo Widely believed – often exaggerated What are media myths? These are well-known stories about or by the news media that are widely believed and often retold but which, under scrutiny, dissolve as apocryphal or wildly exaggerated. The distorting effects of four media myths have become attached to the photograph, which Ut made when he was a 21-year-old photographer for The Associated Press. Prominent among the myths of the "Napalm Girl," which I address and dismantle in my book "Getting It Wrong: Debunking the Greatest Myths in American Journalism," is that U.S.-piloted or guided warplanes dropped the napalm, a gelatinous, incendiary substance, at Trang Bang. Not so. The napalm attack was carried out by propeller-driven Skyraider aircraft of the South Vietnamese Air Force trying to roust communist forces dug in near the village – as news accounts at the time made clear. The headline over The New York Times' report from Trang Bang said: "South Vietnamese Drop Napalm on Own Troops." The Chicago Tribune front page of June 9, 1972, stated the "napalm [was] dropped by a Vietnamese air force Skyraider diving onto the wrong target." Christopher Wain, a veteran British journalist, wrote in a dispatch for United Press International: "These were South Vietnamese planes dropping napalm on South Vietnamese peasants and troops." The myth of American culpability at Trang Bang began taking hold during the 1972 presidential campaign, when Democratic candidate George McGovern referred to the photograph in a televised speech. The napalm that badly burned Kim Phuc, he declared, had been "dropped in the name of America." McGovern's metaphoric claim anticipated similar assertions, including Susan Sontag's statement in her 1973 book "On Photography," that Kim Phuc had been "sprayed by American napalm." The New York Times headline of June 9, 1972, clearly reported it was a South Vietnamese attack that sprayed napalm on troops and civilians. New York Times archive Hastened the war's end? Two other related media myths rest on assumptions that "Napalm Girl" was so powerful that it must have exerted powerful effects on its audiences. These myths claim that the photograph hastened an end to the war and that it turned U.S. public opinion against the conflict. Neither is accurate. Although most U.S. combat forces were out of Vietnam by the time Ut took the photograph, the war went on for nearly three more years. The end came in April 1975, when communist forces overran South Vietnam and seized its capital. Americans' views about the war had turned negative long before June 1972, as measured by a survey question the Gallup Organization posed periodically. The question – essentially a proxy for Americans' views about Vietnam – was whether sending U.S. troops there had been a mistake. When the question was first asked in summer 1965, only 24% of respondents said yes, sending in troops had been a mistake. But by mid-May 1971 – more than a year before "Napalm Girl" was made – 61% of respondents said yes, sending troops had been mistaken policy. In short, public opinion turned against the war long before "Napalm Girl" entered popular consciousness. Ubiquitous? Not exactly Another myth is that "Napalm Girl" appeared on newspaper front pages everywhere in America. Many large U.S. daily newspapers did publish the photograph. But many newspapers abstained, perhaps because it depicted frontal nudity. In a review I conducted with a research assistant of 40 leading daily U.S. newspapers – all of which were Associated Press subscribers – 21 titles placed "Napalm Girl" on the front page. But 14 newspapers – more than one-third of the sample – did not publish "Napalm Girl" at all in the days immediately after its distribution. These included papers in Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Houston and Newark. Only three of the 40 newspapers examined – The Boston Globe, the New York Post and The New York Times – published editorials specifically addressing the photograph. The editorial in the New York Post, then a liberal-minded newspaper, was prophetic in saying: "The picture of the children will never leave anyone who saw it." W. Joseph Campbell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

What 5 previous congressional investigations can teach us about the House Jan. 6 committee hearings Posted: 02 Jun 2022 11:56 AM PDT Chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee Sam Ervin sits with Chief Counsel Sam Dash, Sen. Howard Baker, staffer Rufus Edmiston and others as they listen to a witness during the Watergate hearings. Wally McNamee/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images Six public hearings to be held in June by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection will attempt to answer the question of whether former President Donald Trump and his political allies broke the law in seeking to overturn the 2020 election results. The Jan. 6 hearings are part of a long history of congressional investigation. The first congressional inquiry occurred in the House in 1792 to investigate Gen. Arthur St. Clair's role in the U.S. Army's defeat in the Battle of the Wabash against the tribes of the Northwest Territory. The Senate conducted its first official investigation in 1818, looking into Gen. Andrew Jackson's conduct in the Seminole War. A look back at five of the most noteworthy congressional investigations since those initial probes suggests that Congress regularly has used its constitutional authority to gather facts and draw public attention to important issues in the country. Ku Klux Klan hearings In 1871, Congress established a committee to investigate violence against and intimidation of Black voters in several states. A year later, the committee produced 13 volumes of evidence containing the testimony of over 600 witnesses describing systemic violence – including killings, beatings, lynchings and rapes – committed by the Ku Klux Klan, known also as the KKK. Congress investigated the racist violence of the KKK in 1871. Library of Congress Despite extensive media coverage and the wealth of information uncovered by the committee, many Americans at that time still questioned the KKK's existence. Such skepticism was supported by the Democratic minority report that accompanied Congress' investigation. At a time when Democrats represented the party that had supported slavery, their report legitimized the KKK's actions in undeniably racist language. Segments of the public adopted the bigoted language and ideas contained in the minority report for decades to come. Teapot Dome scandal In 1922, news broke that President Warren G. Harding's administration had secretly leased federal oil fields to political allies. At the time, these no-bid contracts were valued at around $200 million – the equivalent of over $3 billion today. The contracts were awarded by Secretary of the Interior Albert Fall, a former senator and a friend of the president's. Congress opened an investigation into the matter, and a UPI news story said on Jan. 22, 1924, "The assistance of Department of Justice agents, United States marshals and the federal courts will be invoked if necessary, senators said, to force the truth from reluctant witnesses." As a result of the investigation, Fall resigned and was later convicted of bribery. He was the first former Cabinet official in history to be sentenced to prison because of misconduct in office. Harding is considered to be one of the country's worst presidents, in part because of the scandal and corruption brought to light by Congress' investigation. Organized crime and the Kefauver Committee In 1950, Congress formed a special committee in response to a series of news articles suggesting that organized crime was corrupting many local government officials. It was referred to as the Kefauver Committee after its chairman, Democratic Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee. The committee launched an investigation, traveling to 14 major cities in the process. The committee's hearings rank among the most widely viewed congressional investigations in history. It is estimated that 90% of televisions in America were tuned in to the hearings. In part, what made the investigation such good TV was the cast of characters subpoenaed to testify. Mobsters, their girlfriends, former elected officials and their lawyers paraded into the hearings, all captured on live television. Not all witnesses complied with the subpoenas. In fact, the Senate approved 45 contempt of Congress citations in 1951 alone. Litigation over witness noncompliance continued in most cases even after the committee issued its over 11,000-page final report. Virginia Hill Hauser, onetime girlfriend of mobster Bugsy Siegel, talks as members of the Kefauver Senate Crime Investigating Committee listen to her testimony during interstate crime probe hearings at a federal courthouse in New York City on March 15, 1951. AP Photo Watergate In 1973, after seven men from President Richard Nixon's reelection campaign broke into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, the Senate voted 77-0 to establish a committee to investigate the break-in. Throughout the investigation, President Nixon refused to cooperate with the committee's requests for information and directed his aides to do the same. He claimed executive privilege gave him the right to refuse to hand over White House records, including audiotapes, and planned for many of them to be destroyed. The battle between the president and Congress went to court and, hours before the House was scheduled to start debating whether to impeach him, the Supreme Court ruled against Nixon. The tapes showed Nixon had, despite his denials, taken part in the cover-up. Nixon lost the support of prominent Republicans in Congress, and he resigned shortly thereafter to avoid impeachment. Intelligence community and the Church Committee In addition to revealing presidential misconduct, the Watergate Committee investigation found evidence that the U.S. intelligence community was conducting potentially unconstitutional domestic operations, including spying on U.S. citizens. Then, in 1974, The New York Times published an extensive investigation by reporter Seymour M. Hersh suggesting that the CIA maintained at least 10,000 intelligence files on U.S. citizens. Chairman Frank Church, D-Idaho, of the Senate Intelligence Committee, displays a poison dart gun Sept. 17, 1975, as Co-Chairman John G. Tower, R-Texas, looks at the weapon during the panel's probe of the Central Intelligence Agency. AP Photo In response, Congress established a special committee to investigate. The committee's 16-month inquiry exposed the attempted assassinations of foreign political leaders, experiments conducted on U.S. citizens, and covert operations to recruit journalists to monitor private citizens' communications and to spread propaganda over the media. The committee found that every presidential administration from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Richard Nixon had abused its authority. "Intelligence agencies have undermined the constitutional rights of citizens," the final report concluded, "primarily because checks and balances designed by the framers of the Constitution to assure accountability have not been applied." Mainstream oversight A few common themes run throughout these five noteworthy congressional investigations. First, as the legacy of the Church Committee suggests, public hearings help provide a layer of transparency to government. Congress and the media can be allies in investigation. Investigative reporting like in the work that revealed the Teapot Dome scandal and Watergate can lay the groundwork for congressional probes. And media coverage of proceedings like the Kefauver Committee's investigation not only raises public awareness but also puts pressure on federal, state and local government officials to act. But party can get in the way. In one example, partisan infighting and the Democrats' rejection of the KKK proceedings hindered Congress' effectiveness and provided a narrative that helped justify Jim Crow laws and other racist policies. Similarly, party loyalty led many Republicans to remain vocal in support of Nixon until the full scope of the president's actions were revealed through the Watergate investigation. These moments in history also illustrate the importance of examining elected officials' political support networks. When President Harding assumed office, he placed loyal allies in government positions. While these allies helped reinforce Harding's pledge to reorganize government and "return to normalcy," they also perpetuated corruption. Likewise, the Watergate investigation prompted criminal charges against 69 people, including two Cabinet officials. Additionally, dozens of major corporations pleaded guilty to illegally financing Nixon's reelection campaign. While the upcoming hearings of the House Jan. 6 investigative committee will be dealing with unprecedented events in American history, the very investigation of these events has strong precedent. Congress has long exercised its power to investigate some of the greatest problems facing the nation. In that way, the upcoming hearings fit squarely into the mainstream of American government oversight. The views expressed in this article are solely the views of the author and not the Carl Levin Center for Oversight and Democracy.

Qué hay detrás de la escasez de leche de fórmula para bebés en EEUU y cómo asegurarnos de que no se repita Posted: 02 Jun 2022 08:09 AM PDT La escena que encuentran muchos padres estadounidenses que buscan comprar leche de fórmula. Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images La escasez de leche de fórmula para bebés se ha sumado a los problemas de los padres estadounidenses, que ya se enfrentan a las presiones de criar a un bebé durante una pandemia en un país que ocupa el último lugar en cuanto a políticas favorables a la familia. Informes mediáticos cuentan que madres, padres y otros cuidadores han tenido que conducir horas para encontrar tiendas que vendan leche de fórmula. ¿Qué hay detrás de la escasez? ¿Y cómo se puede evitar que se repita? Steven Abrams, un destacado experto en salud pediátrica de la Universidad de Texas que ha asesorado tanto a la industria de la leche de fórmula como al gobierno estadounidense en materia de nutrición infantil, responde a estas preguntas y aconseja a los padres que afrontan dificultades para conseguir un suministro adecuado de leche de fórmula infantil. ¿Por qué hay escasez de leche de fórmula ahora? En realidad, hay dos factores que han provocado la actual escasez. En primer lugar, tenemos el problema de la cadena de suministro, que ha afectado a todo tipo de productos desde el inicio de la pandemia. Se calmó un poco, pero a principios de 2022 se agravó. Luego, en febrero, una importante planta de fabricación de fórmulas para bebés en Estados Unidos se vino abajo. La Food and Drug Administration (Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos, o FDA) cerró la fábrica de Abbott Nutrition en el estado de Michigan. El cierre se produjo después de que Abbott retirara del mercado varias marcas de leche de fórmula, incluidas las fórmulas rutinarias a base de leche de vaca Similac, como Similac Advance, y varias fórmulas especiales para bebés alérgicos, como Similac Alimentum y Similac EleCare. El cierre de la fábrica tuvo que hacerse en medio de una investigación sobre infecciones bacterianas en relación con la fórmula en polvo producida en la planta, y la muerte de al menos dos bebés. El problema es que no hay mucha redundancia en la producción de fórmulas infantiles en Estados Unidos. En otras palabras, no hay suficientes fábricas para suplir la falta de producción cuando una falla. La planta de Michigan es la mayor productora del país, por lo que, cuando se produce una avería, se añade tensión a todo el sistema de distribución de leche de fórmula, especialmente en el caso de ciertas fórmulas para bebés con enfermedades alérgicas y trastornos metabólicos de alto riesgo. En las últimas dos semanas la escasez ha empeorado. No puedo decir con seguridad por qué ha ocurrido esto, pero sospecho que se ha producido un acaparamiento debido a la ansiedad de los padres. Las tiendas pueden limitar la cantidad de leche de fórmula que se puede comprar, pero eso no impide que la gente vaya a comprar más por Internet. Además, la escasez ha recibido una amplia publicidad en los periódicos, en la televisión y en los discursos políticos. Toda esa publicidad alimenta la sensación pública de que el sistema está fallando, provocando más compras de pánico y acaparamiento. ¿A quién afecta la escasez? La mayoría de los padres alimentan a sus hijos con leche de fórmula en algún momento para satisfacer sus necesidades nutricionales, especialmente los bebés más grandes. Al nacer y en los días inmediatamente posteriores, alrededor del 80% de los bebés en EEUU reciben toda su nutrición a través de la leche materna. Pero a los 6 meses, la mayoría de los bebés reciben al menos algo de leche artificial. La proporción de bebés de un año que reciben leche artificial es aún mayor. Esto es en gran parte el resultado de la dinámica y las presiones sociales: las madres vuelven a trabajar después de dar a luz, pero no reciben suficiente apoyo para producir y almacenar cantidades suficientes de leche materna. Pero la escasez afectará a algunos padres más que a otros. No es de extrañar que los padres más afectados sean los que tienen los ingresos más bajos. En Estados Unidos el programa federal de alimentación para mujeres, bebés y niños más pobres, llamado WIC, proporciona leche de fórmula a la mayoría de los bebés de las familias con bajos ingresos. Pero los costes han subido y la leche de fórmula se ha vuelto más escasa. Algunas familias tienen que conducir dos horas para encontrar tiendas que vendan leche de fórmula. Evidentemente, eso será más difícil para las familias más pobres, ya que hay costes de por medio. Del mismo modo, los padres más acomodados pueden comprar fórmulas más caras, de las llamadas marcas de élite. Otro aspecto a tener en cuenta es que la escasez afecta tanto a la leche de fórmula normal como a las versiones especializadas. La fórmula normal o estándar es el tipo con el que la mayoría de las familias están familiarizadas, y alrededor del 95% de los bebés alimentados con fórmula en EEUU reciben el tipo estándar. La fórmula especializada es para los bebés con necesidades inusuales, debido a alergias, intestinos dañados o necesidades nutricionales especiales. Antes de que la fábrica de Michigan cerrara, fabricaba la mayor parte de la fórmula infantil especializada que se utiliza en EEUU, por lo que es una crisis absoluta para las familias que necesitan ese tipo de fórmula. ¿Cuáles son las posibles consecuencias de la escasez? En los primeros seis meses, los bebés sólo deben tomar leche materna o de fórmula; cualquier otra cosa que se les dé será nutricionalmente incompleta. Por tanto, existe el riesgo de que la escasez suponga que los bebés no reciban la nutrición que necesitan para desarrollarse. Esto podría provocar una serie de problemas de salud que afectarían a su crecimiento físico y a su desarrollo cerebral. Además, existe la preocupación de que los padres utilicen alternativas poco seguras, como diluir la leche de fórmula de su bebé. Se sabe que hay personas que intentan fabricar la suya propia mezclando leche en polvo o leche vegana con vitaminas. Estas alternativas no sólo no son completas desde el punto de vista nutricional, sino que pueden no ser del todo estériles. Después de los seis meses, las cosas mejoran un poco cuando el bebé puede empezar a comer alimentos sólidos. Pero incluso entonces, la fórmula o la leche materna siguen siendo la principal fuente de nutrición. Por tanto, puede seguir existiendo el riesgo de que se produzcan carencias nutricionales, como las de hierro. ¿Existen alternativas viables? A partir de los seis meses de edad, y durante periodos de tiempo razonablemente cortos, los padres pueden alimentar a los bebés con leche de vaca entera y buscar suplementos de hierro. No es lo ideal, y sólo se aplica a los bebés mayores. Para los menores de seis meses, la leche de vaca es un verdadero problema. No tiene la mezcla de proteínas adecuada para los bebés y casi no tiene hierro, lo que supone un riesgo de anemia para los bebés más pequeños. La leche de vaca también tiene un desequilibrio de minerales, especialmente para los bebés más pequeños. Entonces, ¿qué orientación hay para los padres con bajos ingresos? Es un reto y no puedo dar una respuesta mágica. Pero los bancos de alimentos y el programa WIC han sido un salvavidas crucial. El programa WIC, en particular, ha demostrado ser muy flexible durante esta escasez. Cuando Abbott tuvo que retirar productos y luego no pudo proporcionar suficientes fórmulas no retiradas en los estados en los que era el proveedor de WIC, WIC fue capaz de cambiar de proveedor y reprogramar las tarjetas EBT para permitir a los padres de bajos ingresos comprar diferentes marcas. ¿Qué se puede hacer para evitar que esta situación se repita? En primer lugar, tenemos que ayudar a las familias a recuperar la confianza en el sistema de producción y suministro de leche artificial. Esto evitará problemas como el acaparamiento o la elaboración de fórmulas caseras. A continuación, debemos estudiar cómo garantizar que la caída de una planta no afecte a todo el sistema. El gobierno federal no puede hacer acopio de leche de fórmula de la misma manera que podría hacer acopio de petróleo, ya que la leche de fórmula tiene una vida útil. Pero la diversificación de la producción de preparados para lactantes es una posibilidad. Esto supondría asegurarse de que varias fábricas y empresas producen las fórmulas que este país necesita. Esto no significa necesariamente un aumento de los costes, ya que la competencia podría hacer bajar los precios. Creo que EEUU también tiene que analizar el sistema de apoyo a la lactancia materna del país. No me malinterpreten, algunos padres siempre necesitarán leche artificial. Pero aquellos que quieren amamantar – se necesita hacer todo lo posible para apoyarlos. Eso incluye mejores políticas de licencia familiar, y ayuda para las madres de bajos ingresos que quieren bombear y almacenar la leche mientras trabajan. Este artículo fue traducido por Univision. Steven A. Abrams ha recibido fondos de Perrigo Nutrition para investigación en materia de la seguridad alimentaria en Austin, Texas, durante la pandemia COVID. Ha hecho presentaciones pagadas sobre la fisiología de la nutrición, para la unidad educativa de Abbott Nutrition, o ANHI.

Future COVID-19 booster shots will likely need fresh formulations as new coronavirus variants of concern continue to emerge Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:17 AM PDT Viral surveillance and prediction may be key parts of figuring out what goes into a vaccine. Pexels Cover/500px via Getty Images Being up to date on COVID-19 vaccines means having had three or four doses of the same shot at this point. Current boosters are the same formulations as the first authorized shots, based on the original strain of the coronavirus that emerged in late 2019. They do still protect against severe COVID-19, hospitalizations and deaths. But as immunity wanes over time and new, more contagious SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge, the world needs a long-term boosting strategy. I'm an immunologist who studies immunity to viruses. I was a part of the teams that helped develop the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and the monoclonal antibody therapies from Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca. How many lines will ultimately be filled out on your COVID-19 vaccination card? LPETTET/E+ via Getty Images I often get asked how frequently, or infrequently, I think people are likely to need COVID-19 booster shots in the future. No one has a crystal ball to see which SARS-CoV-2 variant will come next or how good future variants will be at evading vaccine immunity. But looking to other respiratory viral foes that have troubled humanity for a while can suggest what the future could look like. Influenza virus provides one example. It's endemic in humans, meaning it hasn't disappeared and continues to cause recurrent seasonal waves of infection in the population. Every year officials try to predict the best formulation of a flu shot to reduce the risk of severe disease. As SARS-CoV-2 continues to evolve and is likely to become endemic, it is possible people may need periodic booster shots for the foreseeable future. I suspect scientists will eventually need to update the COVID-19 vaccine to take on newer variants, as they do for flu. Forecasting flu, based on careful surveillance Influenza virus surveillance offers a potential model for how SARS-CoV-2 could be tracked over time. Flu viruses have caused several pandemics, including the one in 1918 that killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide. Every year there are seasonal outbreaks of flu, and every year officials encourage the public to get their flu shots. Each year, health agencies including the World Health Organization's Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System make an educated guess based on the flu strains circulating in the Southern Hemisphere about which ones are most likely to circulate in the Northern Hemisphere's upcoming flu season. Then large-scale vaccine production begins, based on the selected flu strains. Some flu seasons, the vaccine doesn't turn out to be a great match with the virus strains that end up circulating most widely. Those years, the shot is not as good at preventing severe illness. While this prediction process is far from perfect, the flu vaccine field has benefited from strong viral surveillance systems and a concerted international effort by public health agencies to prepare. While the particulars for influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses are different, I think the COVID-19 field should think about adopting similar surveillance systems in the long term. Staying on top of what strains are circulating will help researchers update the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to match up-to-date coronavirus variants. How SARS-CoV-2 has evolved so far SARS-CoV-2 faces an evolutionary quandary as it reproduces and spreads from person to person. The virus needs to maintain its ability to get into human cells using its spike protein, while still changing in ways that allow it to evade vaccine immunity. Vaccines are designed to get your body to recognize a particular spike protein, so the more it changes, the higher the chance that the vaccine will be ineffective against the new variant. Despite these challenges, SARS-CoV-2 and its variants have successfully evolved to be more transmissible and to better evade people's immune responses. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern has emerged and dominated transmission in a series of contagion waves every four to seven months. Almost like clockwork, the D614G variant emerged in the spring of 2020 and overtook the original SARS-CoV-2 outbreak strain. In late 2020 and early 2021, the alpha variant emerged and dominated transmission. In mid-2021, the delta variant overtook alpha and then dominated transmission until it was displaced by the omicron variant at the end of 2021. There's no reason to think this trend won't continue. In the coming months, the world may see a dominant descendant of the various omicron subvariants. And it's certainly possible a new variant will emerge from a nondominant pool of SARS-CoV-2, which is how omicron itself came to be. Current booster shots are simply additional doses of the vaccines based on the outbreak SARS-CoV-2 virus strain that has long been extinct. The coronavirus variants have changed a lot from the original virus, which doesn't bode well for continued vaccine efficacy. The idea of tailor-made annual shots – like the flu vaccine – sounds appealing. The problem is that scientists haven't yet been able to predict what the next SARS-CoV-2 variant will be with any degree of confidence. Periodic booster shots may be in order for the foreseeable future. Spencer Platt/Getty Images Planning for the future Yes, the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variants in the upcoming fall and winter seasons may look different from the omicron subvariants currently circulating. But an updated booster that more closely resembles today's omicron subvariants, coupled with the immunity people already have from the first vaccines, will likely offer better protection going forward. It might require less frequent boosting – at least as long as omicron sublineages continue to dominate. The Food and Drug Administration is set to meet in the coming weeks to decide what the fall boosters should be in time for manufacturers to produce the shots. Vaccine makers like Moderna are currently testing their booster candidates in people and evaluating the immune response against newly emerging variants. The test results will likely decide what will be used in anticipation of a fall or winter surge. Another possibility is to pivot the vaccine booster strategy to include universal coronavirus vaccine approaches that already look promising in animal studies. Researchers are working toward what's called a universal vaccine which would be effective against multiple strains. Some focus on chimeric spikes, which fuse parts of the spike of different coronaviruses together in one vaccine, to broaden protective immunity. Others are experimenting with nanoparticle vaccines that get the immune system to focus on the most vulnerable regions within the coronavirus spike. These strategies have been shown to ward off difficult-to-stop SARS-CoV-2 variants in lab experiments. They also work in animals against the original SARS virus that caused an outbreak in the early 2000s as well as zoonotic coronaviruses from bats that could jump into humans, causing a future SARS-CoV-3 outbreak. Science has provided multiple safe and effective vaccines that reduce the risk of severe COVID-19. Reformulating booster strategies, either toward universal-based vaccines or updated boosters, can help steer us out of the COVID-19 pandemic. David R. Martinez receives funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the Burroughs Wellcome Fund.

Teachers often struggle to address mass traumatic events in class Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:16 AM PDT Educators get little to no training in how to deal with traumatic events. Pixelimage / Getty Images After the Paris attacks of 2015 – a series of attacks in which gunmen opened fire on nightspots and a concert hall in Paris – a U.S.-based high school teacher of French described her failure to discuss the attacks in class as a "lost opportunity." "I was working through my own feelings and did not know how to approach it," she told us in a survey after the attacks. "I only talked about it when the students brought it up and I kept conversations short. "I think I should have been more open, honest, and offered more opportunities for students to process and take some action, even if it was a moment of silence, to honor the victims and help the families and survivors," the teacher continued. "I let my fear of not knowing what to do guide me and I regret it." Such feelings are by no means uncommon among schoolteachers after a mass traumatic event has occurred, as we have learned as researchers who specialize in student mental health and well-being. This teacher was just one of almost 100 U.S.-based teachers of French whom we surveyed after the 2015 Paris attacks. We also surveyed about 150 Massachusetts teachers following the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. The National Association of School Psychologists recommends that teachers make time to talk to students about high-profile acts of violence, including attacks against schools, such as the May 2022 massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. However, the teachers whom we surveyed regularly told us that initiating these conversations is difficult. In response to our surveys, the teachers wrote about the challenges of entering their classroom the morning after a crisis. Here is what they told us: 1. There is no typical way that students will respond Psychologists are clear that, after a mass trauma, a wide range of feelings and responses is normal. For teachers, this means that in a classroom of 25 students, there might be 25 different reactions. Students may also differ in their knowledge and understanding of what happened in the event. Whereas parents can focus on just their own children, teachers need to navigate complex conversations with many students at once, realizing that some students may be deeply affected, while others have little reaction. For example, after the Boston Marathon attack in April 2013, a teacher wrote about the challenges of anticipating how her students would respond: "Because the students I serve have trauma histories and emotional disabilities, it is very difficult to determine the impact of the events in April on students, as so many other factors play a role." 2. There is no script to address trauma Conversations about crises are unpredictable. Teachers don't know what topics and questions students will raise and are often left to find their own materials. One teacher wrote about preparing to return to school following the Boston Marathon attack: "I spent a lot of time and energy working on a plan for my class on my own, but I know that other teachers who did not have the luxury to do so, or who were less experienced teachers, were much more worried about going into school than I was." Other teachers commented on their uncertainty entering the classroom. A teacher of middle and high school French wrote after the Paris attacks: "[I] had many students ask me about the attacks and I spoke with them privately about the tragedy but said that I didn't feel comfortable discussing the events as an entire class. If I had more resources or time or training to address these events with teens I would love to be able to without the fear of offending someone or having a student say something insensitive." 3. Students are not the only audience While students are the focus of teachers' attention, families may have strong opinions about if or how schools talk about mass trauma. Even when school staff members know how to navigate conversations with students based on best practices and developmental considerations, families may have their own opinions about what is appropriate to discuss in school. An elementary school French teacher wrote about her concern that she would provide more information than parents would like: "I told them that if they had questions, they should talk to their parents, because I wanted to respect the parents' wishes as far as how much the kids knew." An elementary school science teacher wrote a similar response after the Boston Marathon attack: "I was also always fearful that one student who knew all about the attacks would start talking about it with students who had no idea what had happened and I would be stuck trying to mediate the situation, wary of what parents would say if students come home talking about the event after parents had decided not to expose their child to it." 4. Events are linked to broader social, political and cultural contexts As teachers prepared to discuss a traumatic event, they said they also needed to be ready to discuss the context of the event. For example, a middle and high school teacher of French wrote that she "experienced strong conservative political reactions from students," which she said she wasn't expecting. "I expected to help them grieve, but I felt unprepared to navigate a debate on gun control in one class and bombing Syria in another. … I tried to offer counterpoints while simultaneously being unaware of how far I can push before getting into hot water." 5. Teachers are affected, too Often teachers live and teach in communities directly affected by traumatic events. Or, as with the Uvalde, Texas massacre, teachers may themselves feel scared or affected by events. For example, an eighth and ninth grade French and Spanish teacher wrote after the Paris attacks that she, "as an adult, was much more traumatized than the kids." "To me it was another 9/11 moment," she said. "I was the one feeling lost, shocked and upset." A first grade teacher similarly wrote after the Boston Marathon attack: "Most of the students wanted school to resume as normal – they wanted consistency and something familiar. It was the adults that needed the most help comprehending, processing and dealing with the events." When we asked teachers how their schools can better support them, two messages came across clearly. First, leadership is essential. Several teachers noted the importance of school leaders meeting with staff to discuss their feelings and prepare to respond before resuming school. They also discussed the importance of school leaders sending out communications to educators and families, explaining how the school will respond. Second, teachers want to know what to say. An April 2022 study found that only five states required future teachers to receive training in how to respond to trauma. Teachers expressed that they want training and guidance in how to discuss traumatic events with students, including how to open the conversation, how to respond to difficult questions, and how to support students throughout the discussion. For example, a fifth grade teacher wrote after the Boston Marathon attack: "Training! We have no training on this. We get emails from our superiors that tell us to address the events, with not much training on how to do it. I feel like I'm good at this type of thing – but not all teachers in my school are. … The result is that some kids get their needs met by their teacher and some don't." The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

5 ways to reduce school shootings Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:16 AM PDT Restrictive gun laws bring down the murder rate. Anadolu Agency / Getty Images After the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, in 2018, psychology professor Paul Boxer and his colleagues reviewed research to see what could be learned from what they refer to as the "science of violence prevention." In the wake of the May 24, 2022, massacre at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, Boxer has revisited that research anew – and other research conducted since then – for insights on what can be done to reduce the risk of school shootings in the future. Here he offers five policy changes – based on his findings – that can be implemented to achieve that end. 1. Dramatically limit access to guns Gun regulation matters. When my colleagues and I looked at gun regulations on a state-by-state basis, we found that more restrictive gun laws are associated with lower rates of homicides by guns. This relation held even after we took demographic, economic and educational factors into account. Others researchers have found that "permissive firearm laws and higher rates of gun ownership" were linked with higher rates of school shootings. What these results essentially mean is that in states where it is more difficult to acquire a gun, fewer people are killed by guns. Examples of these restrictions are raising the age for legal purchase, imposing lengthy waiting periods before access, requiring meaningful background checks, and more. These and similar measures – for example, eliminating access for individuals at a high risk of committing violence, such as the perpetrators of domestic violence – all move toward making it significantly harder to access guns, which would reduce gun violence substantially. Placing meaningful restrictions or outright bans on firearm equipment associated with greater lethality, such as assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines, should also lower the number of people being killed by firearms. Research already has shown that greater access to guns is associated with higher numbers of gun deaths. 2. Use more violence risk assessments in schools In the years since the Columbine shooting in 1999, researchers and federal law enforcement agencies have studied school shootings and developed risk assessments to gauge the likelihood of actual violence by a young person identified as a possible risk. These assessments are conducted by professionals that include police officers, school officials and teachers. They also involve mental health professionals, such as school counselors and psychologists. Together, these professionals all consult with one another to determine a young person's risk for violence. These teams may not be able to prevent every possible incident. Still, this sort of approach is critical to improving the process of identifying and stopping potential shooters overall. Guidance on how to use these assessments is freely available and based in extensive applied research. For example, in one 2015 study, the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines – a set of guidelines for the investigation of a reported threat, thorough assessment of the individual making the threat, and preventive or protective measures to be taken in response – were shown to reduce rates of student aggression. They were also shown to lower out-of-school suspension rates while improving teacher and student perceptions of safety. 3. Expand evidence-based strategies to reduce violent behavior To help reduce the number of youths who grow up to become violent, governmental agencies could increase the availability and use of evidence-based interventions in schools. Aggressive and violent behavior has been shown by research to emerge from a mix of personal and environmental risk factors. The factors include impulsivity, callousness, exposure to violence and victimization. In light of this research, effective approaches were developed to prevent aggression by teaching students to problem-solve for better responses to peer conflict. They also teach students to think carefully about others' motivations when they feel provoked. Programs shown to reduce aggressive behavior typically train youths who already have exhibited some aggression on new and better coping skills for managing stress and anger. And for youths who have become seriously violent, treatments teach new, constructive behavioral and communication skills to youths and their caregivers. The treatments also help young people develop better relationships with family members and school personnel. 4. Make school buildings safer The Robb Elementary School shooter entered the school building through a door that reportedly malfunctioned. This highlights the absolute importance for schools to take and maintain physical security measures. In the wake of school shootings, schools often turn to solutions such as upgraded camera surveillance or increased law enforcement. These measures can have mixed effects on students' perceptions of safety and support – cameras posted outside appear to increase felt safety, whereas cameras posted inside seem to promote unease. Increased law enforcement presence might make teachers feel safer in school. But it also might criminalize student misbehavior without actually making schools safer. Still, there are number of ways for schools to improve physical security without increasing student anxiety or needlessly deploying law enforcement. For example, in one large study, students were less likely to skip school because of safety concerns when metal detectors were used at school entry points. In that study, those metal detectors also reduced the likelihood of weapons being brought into schools. 5. Reduce exposure to violence through media and social media Entertainment media and social media are saturated with violent images of physical assaults, gun violence and gore. Exposure to and participation in virtual violence might not lead to aggressive behavior for all children and adolescents. But watching violent programs and playing violent video games can lead to increased hostility, aggressive feelings, emotional desensitization to violence and ultimately aggressive behavior. These effects can potentially be lessened by reducing the amount of screen violence to which children and adolescents are exposed over time, particularly early in development. Paul Boxer receives funding from the Centers for Disease Control.

Supreme Court allows states to use unlawfully gerrymandered congressional maps in the 2022 midterm elections Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:15 AM PDT Mississippi state legislators review an option for redrawing the state's voting districts at the state Capitol in Jackson on March 29, 2022. AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis In the upcoming midterm elections, states may use maps that a federal court has found unlawful. You read that right: The U.S. Supreme Court recently barred federal courts from requiring states to fix their newly adopted, but unlawful, congressional maps before the 2022 midterm congressional elections. In Merrill v. Milligan, the Supreme Court in February 2022, stayed the decision of a lower court that ruled Alabama had improperly redistricted its congressional seats. The lower court found Alabama's maps resulted in Black and Democratic voters wielding less political power in Alabama's congressional delegation than they otherwise would or should. It required Alabama to redraw its congressional map immediately. The Supreme Court left Alabama's congressional redistricting – deemed a violation of the Voting Rights Act by the lower court – in place through the 2022 midterm elections, without deciding for itself whether the maps are unlawful. This ruling will guide federal judges considering similar cases in states across the country. The decision will affect who gets elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and may determine control of Congress. It may not flip control of Congress from one party to another, but it almost certainly will affect the majority of the party that controls Congress. The Supreme Court froze a lower court ruling that Alabama must draw new congressional district maps after revised ones were ruled unlawful and would have lowered Black voting power in the 2022 elections. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images The ideal The U.S. Constitution requires a census every 10 years, which triggers congressional redistricting. As the Congressional Research Service describes this process, "reapportionment is the process of dividing seats for the House among the 50 states following the decennial census. Redistricting refers to the process that follows, in which states create new congressional districts or redraw existing district boundaries to adjust for population changes and/or changes in the number of House seats for the state." The reapportionment of the House of Representatives mandated by the Constitution and the requirement the Supreme Court enshrined in the 1960s that one person's vote in a state should be approximately equal to another person's vote in the state – known as "one person, one vote" – require virtually every state to redistrict after each census. States losing or gaining congressional representatives because of population loss or gain are most clearly required to redistrict. In the wake of the 2020 census, West Virginia lost one representative. Texas gained two representatives, for example. States that do not gain or lose congressional representation typically must also redraw their congressional districts. Population shifts inside a state – people moving from one part of the state to another – over the prior decade will require new districts be drawn to create districts with equal population. A state's congressional districts must contain roughly equal populations to meet the Constitution's one person, one vote doctrine. Consequently, a state that has been apportioned 10 representatives and has 8 million people must redistrict to guarantee each of its congressional districts contains approximately 800,000 people. Election posters in Huntington, West Virginia, on Oct. 19, 2018; the state lost one seat in the U.S. House of Representatives during 2020 redistricting. Michael Mathes/AFP via Getty Images The reality State legislatures or state redistricting commissions draw a state's congressional districts. Such redistricting can lead to racial gerrymandering, which can diminish the power of racial groups and is unconstitutional or unlawful under federal law. It can also result in partisan gerrymandering, which gives an advantage to one party or the other. This may violate state law, but unlike racial gerrymandering, it does not violate federal law or the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court decided in 2019. Voters, political organizations and legislators, among others, may challenge redistricting plans. Dozens of cases have been filed in state and federal court challenging aspects of congressional redistricting plans drawn in the wake of the 2020 census. Litigants may request that the districts be redrawn either by the legislature or redistricting commission that originally drew them, or by courts. The legal principle that justice delayed is justice denied would suggest improper gerrymandering should be fixed as quickly as possible. The Supreme Court appears to disagree. The court rests its mandated indolence on the Purcell principle, which claims electoral changes occurring too close to an election will confuse voters. The court has not defined how close to an election is too close to an election. The court also does not appear to closely consider how crucial such an electoral change might be in creating a fair electoral outcome. Certainly, some changes that occur on the eve of an election – altering who can vote, how they can vote and where they can vote – may unfairly confuse voters and provide no significant benefits. But redrawing an electoral map months before a general election might not be that kind of disruptive change. Redrawing maps close to primary elections may cause confusion; however, primary elections may be delayed until legal maps can be drawn. Congressional candidates may be inconvenienced if congressional districts are altered relatively close to an election, however "close" is defined. However, their inconvenience may not outweigh the need to draw fair districts that give everyone an equal voice. The effect The court's choice to allow unlawful congressional redistricting plans to stand will likely affect who gets elected to the House of Representatives. How districts are drawn may determine which candidates run and which candidates win. A state's gerrymandered districts yield a different congressional delegation than if the districts were not gerrymandered. The Supreme Court's approach may have two important effects. First, the power to gerrymander or stop gerrymandering will now rest with state officials and judges. In New York, state courts have deemed the congressional districts the State Assembly drew to be unlawfully gerrymandered under state law to benefit Democrats. The New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, ordered non-gerrymandered maps be drawn. New maps – drawn by an independent scholar – that are more favorable to Republicans than prior maps were released in mid-May. The House of Representatives is created by 435 local races. If one party is a net winner in the state-level gerrymandering battles, the winning party will keep its spoils until at least 2024. That will affect the legislation Congress passes and the run-up to the 2024 presidential election. Second, even if Democrats and Republicans are equally successful in their ability to win state-level gerrymandering battles, the Supreme Court's refusal to allow federal courts to address gerrymandered congressional districts may lead to districts that are more gerrymandered on both sides than they would have been otherwise. That, too, may affect the composition of the House of Representatives. If gerrymandered districts yield more highly partisan representatives, the Supreme Court's actions will likely lead to a House that is more highly partisan and less likely to produce bipartisan legislation. That may have implications for abortion, tax and economic policies and the many other issues Congress may address or fail to address. The Supreme Court's mandate to lower courts to take time to decide gerrymandering cases may appear procedural. However, it may have real, measurable effects in the lives of Americans. Henry L. Chambers Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Listening to young people could help reduce pandemic-related harms to children Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:14 AM PDT Kids say they have felt ignored amid policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic that seemed more focused on the fates of restaurants, bars and entertainment venues than keeping schools open and safe. kali9/E+ via Getty Images As the COVID-19 pandemic extends into a third year, experts have gained a much better understanding of its consequences for the health and development of children and adolescents. They range from learning loss to mental health issues to housing and food insecurity to contracting the virus itself. We are a law professor who focuses on children's rights and well-being and a practicing family physician who researches adolescent health. We and other researchers have found that over the past two years, governments have missed opportunities to better understand and address what young people have been going through as they navigate the pandemic. A better understanding of the pandemic's effects on young people is essential to developing policy responses that can address the breadth of harms children and adolescents are experiencing. The pandemic's impacts on children Research has found that, on average, K-12 students fell behind by about five months in mathematics and four months in reading during the 2020-2021 school year compared with students before the pandemic. Many students lost the equivalent of half a year or more of learning, with students in low-income and majority-Black schools being hit hardest. This learning loss puts many students at risk of not finishing high school, and it jeopardizes their chances of attending college, all of which has adverse consequences for lifetime earning potential. The pandemic has also adversely affected children's mental health. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 37% of high schoolers reported poor mental health and 44% reported that they "persistently felt sad or hopeless" during the pandemic. Other research, including a recent surgeon general's advisory on young people's mental health, has found higher rates of depression, anxiety, loneliness and other social-emotional issues among children since the pandemic. Basic needs including food and housing have also been put at risk by the pandemic. Job losses, disruptions in school-based meal programs and other adverse impacts on families led to an increase in the number of families experiencing food insecurity, putting children at risk of being unable to get adequate nutrition for healthy development. In addition, millions of children and their families have experienced housing insecurity. The Eviction Lab, which tracks evictions in six states and 31 U.S. cities, reports that more than 939,000 evictions have occurred since March 2020. Even when families can stave off eviction, housing insecurity adversely affects children's educational progress and well-being. Finally, we know that many children have contracted COVID-19 – more than 13 million by official counts – though research suggests the numbers are much higher. Children should be seen and heard Policymakers frequently dismiss young people as too immature to participate in the "serious business" of policymaking. This attitude has persisted during the pandemic: Young people have seldom been consulted on public health policy changes that affect them directly, from schools to transportation to public parks. For example, most decisions regarding moves to virtual schooling and back to in-person learning were made without input from children – the very population most affected by these decisions. This failure to engage young people stems largely from the conventional view that children and adolescents are "becomings," not "beings" – that is, because they are developing, they lack maturity to make important decisions and thus should be "seen and not heard." However, we have learned through our own research and engagement with young people – as well as through other youth participation projects and reports – that this mindset is outdated and fails to recognize the knowledge young people's lived experience offers. In our research and partnering with youths, we have found consistently that involving young people at all stages – from identifying issues to designing and implementing projects to developing policy recommendations – improves outcomes. Why consulting with children matters The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes that young people have a right to be heard and to participate in decisions that affect their lives. Research shows that that while young people may not want the burden of making the final decision, they do want a say in what happens in their lives and their communities. The effects of school shutdowns on children's learning is still being researched. Paras Griffin/Contributor via Getty Images North America Research has found that listening to and engaging young people helps adults better understand the challenges children face. Giving young people meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that affect their lives can lead to important insights about whether particular options will be effective and can help identify more promising solutions. In addition, experience shows that involving youths in the development of policies and programs increases the likelihood of better buy-in from young people on the final decisions. In turn, buy-in helps improve outcomes. For example, while children may not be experts on education theory, they are the only ones alive today who have ever navigated school during a global pandemic. Their lived experience offers expertise that can help inform and improve policies and outcomes. Moreover, involving young people now will help them develop the skills they need to prepare for adulthood. Listen, involve and create pathways Our work suggests that there are various ways adults can partner with children on creating policies and programs during this pandemic, as well as in future public health crises. A few of these include: – Parents, teachers, school administrators and community leaders can simply listen more often to children. This may best be done by "meeting them where they are," which can include paying attention to what youths express on social media to connecting with them through text messages or asking them more often how they are doing. Adults can ask them what they're concerned about or what they want to see happen, or create supportive in-person and virtual groups. – Adults can actively involve young people in what is happening in their communities and engage them in responses to the pandemic in age-appropriate ways. There are good examples of children having an impact during the pandemic. With ideas originating from youths themselves, young people have taken on leadership roles in their communities, leveraging their skills to do everything from producing mask extenders for health care workers to starting a food delivery business to aid elderly community members. – Schools, communities and policymakers can create permanent pathways for young people to participate in developing and implementing policies – and don't have to wait for a pandemic to do it. In Colorado, the Growing Up Boulder initiative has successfully engaged young people on a breadth of policy issues including transportation, urban planning, housing and parks-related projects. Other cities, such as Minneapolis and San Francisco, have established youth commissions and congresses that provide ongoing ways for young people to have a say in their communities. All three examples – from regular, informal check-ins with youths to official youth commissions – can enable policymakers, parents, teachers and other adults to learn from young people and partner with them to develop more effective responses to the pandemic or any other issue. The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Should we protect nature for its own sake? For its economic value? Because it makes us happy? Yes Posted: 02 Jun 2022 05:12 AM PDT A ladybug crawls on a paloverde flower in Joshua Tree National Park, California. Hannah Schwalbe, NPS/Flickr As spring phases into summer in North America, with trees flowering and birds migrating, nature seems abundant. In fact, however, the Earth is losing animals, birds, reptiles and other living things so fast that some scientists believe the planet is entering the sixth mass extinction in its history. This fall, the United Nations will convene governments from around the world in Kunming, China, to establish new goals for protecting Earth's ecosystems and their biodiversity – the variety of life at all levels, from genes to ecosystems. Some people, cultures and nations believe biodiversity is worth conserving because ecosystems provide many services that support human prosperity, health and well-being. Others assert that all living things have a right to exist, regardless of their usefulness to humans. Today, there's also growing understanding that nature enriches our lives by providing opportunities for us to connect with each other and the places we care about. As a conservation biologist, I've been part of the effort to value biodiversity for years. Here's how thinking in this field has evolved, and why I've come to believe that there are many equally valid reasons for protecting nature. Biodiversity describes both the amount of genetic diversity within species and the range of species that make up ecosystems. Defending every species Conservation biology is a scientific field with a mission: protecting and restoring biodiversity around the world. It came of age in the 1980s, as humans' impact on the Earth was becoming alarmingly clear. In a 1985 essay, Michael Soulé, one of the field's founders, described what he saw as the core principles of conservation biology. Soulé argued that biological diversity is inherently good and should be conserved because it has intrinsic value. He also proposed that conservation biologists should act to save biodiversity even if sound science isn't available to inform decisions. To critics, Soulé's principles sounded more like environmental activism than science. What's more, not everyone agreed then or now that biodiversity is inherently good. After all, wild animals can destroy crops and endanger human lives. Contact with nature can lead to disease. And some conservation initiatives have displaced people from their land or prevented development that might otherwise improve people's lives. Valuing nature's services Soule's essay spurred many researchers to push for a more science-driven approach to conservation. They sought to directly quantify the value of ecosystems and the roles species played in them. Some scholars focused on calculating the value of ecosystems to humans. They reached a preliminary conclusion that the total economic value of the world's ecosystems was worth an average US$33 trillion per year in 1997 dollars. At the time, this was nearly twice the global value of the entire world's financial markets. This estimate included services such as predators controlling pests that would otherwise ruin crops; pollinators helping to produce fruits and vegetables; wetlands, mangroves and other natural systems buffering coasts against storms and flooding; oceans providing fish for food; and forests providing lumber and other building materials. Researchers have refined their estimates of what these benefits are worth, but their central conclusion remains the same: Nature has shockingly high economic value that existing financial markets don't account for. Forests and fields help to supply New York City with high-quality drinking water, most of which doesn't need filtering. A second group began to quantify the non-monetary value of nature for human health, happiness and well-being. Studies typically had people take part in outdoor activities, such as strolling through a green space, hiking in the woods or canoeing on a lake. Later, they measured the subjects' physical or emotional health. This research found that spending time in nature tended to reduce blood pressure, lower hormones related to stress and anxiety, decrease the probability of depression and improve cognitive function and certain immune functions. People exposed to nature fared better than others who took part in similar activities in non-natural settings, such as walking through a city. Losing species weakens ecosystems A third line of research asked a different question: When ecosystems lose species, can they still function and provide services? This work was driven mainly by experiments where researchers directly manipulated the diversity of different types of organisms in settings ranging from laboratory cultures to greenhouses, plots in fields, forests and coastal areas. By 2010, scientists had published more than 600 experiments, manipulating over 500 groups of organisms in freshwater, marine and land ecosystems. In a 2012 review of these experiments, colleagues and I found unequivocal evidence that when ecosystems lose biodiversity, they become less efficient, less productive and less stable. And they are less able to deliver many of the services that underlie human well-being. For example, we found strong evidence that loss of genetic diversity reduced crop yields, and loss of tree diversity reduced the amount of wood that forests produced. We also found evidence that oceans with fewer fish species produced less-reliable catches, and that ecosystems with lower plant diversity were more prone to invasive pests and diseases. Converting forested land for agriculture, as on this soy plantation in Para, Brazil, is a top cause of biodiversity loss. Ricardo Beliel/Brazil Photos/LightRocket via Getty Images We also showed that it was possible to develop robust mathematical models that could predict reasonably well how biodiversity loss would affect certain types of valuable services from ecosystems. Many motives for protecting nature For years, I believed that this work had established the value of ecosystems and quantified how biodiversity provided ecosystem services. But I've come to realize that other arguments for protecting nature are just as valid, and often more convincing for many people. I have worked with many people who donate money or land to support conservation. But I've never heard anyone say they were doing it because of the economic value of biodiversity or its role in sustaining ecosystem services. Instead, they've shared stories about how they grew up fishing with their father, held family gatherings at a cabin or canoed with someone who was important to them. They wanted to pass on those experiences to their children and grandchildren to preserve familial relationships. Researchers increasingly recognize that such relational values – connections to communities and to specific places – are one of the most common reasons why people choose to conserve nature. I also know many people who hold deep religious beliefs and are rarely swayed by scientific arguments for conservation. But when Pope Francis published his 2015 encyclical Laudato si': On Care for Our Common Home and said God's followers had a moral responsibility to care for his creation, my religious relatives, friends and colleagues suddenly wanted to know about biodiversity loss and what they might do about it. Surveys show that 85% of the world's population identifies with a major religion. Leaders of every major religion have published declarations similar to Pope Francis' encyclical, calling on their followers to be better stewards of Earth. Undoubtedly, a large portion of humanity assigns moral value to nature. Research clearly shows that nature provides humanity with enormous value. But some people simply believe that other species have a right to exist, or that their religion tells them to be good stewards of Earth. As I see it, embracing these diverse perspectives is the best way to get global buy-in for conserving Earth's ecosystems and living creatures for the good of all. Bradley J. Cardinale receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He is affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Ecological Society of America, the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the Society for Conservation Biology, the Society for Freshwater Science, and the Midwest's Environmental Law and Policy Center,

As the UK celebrates Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee, why will so many Americans also be cheering her on? Posted: 01 Jun 2022 11:55 AM PDT Polling backs it up – Americans really do look favorably on Queen Elizabeth II. AP Photo/Alberto Pezzal Whether it is reporting the role of the Sex Pistols or that of the royal corgis, U.S. media has suddenly taken an interest in a peculiar four-day ceremony taking place across the pond: Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee. Starting on June 2, 2022, British subjects will be participating in street parties and other events marking the 70 years that the country's monarch has remained on the throne. They won't be alone in expressing affection for the queen. In America, Elizabeth retains approval ratings that would leave most political leaders envious. And even if the most high-profile U.S.-based royalists – Prince Harry and his American wife Meghan Markle – intend to be in the U.K. for some of the ceremonies, many other supporters of Queen Elizabeth will be back in America, no doubt raising a cup of tea in her honor. But what's with Americans' fascination with the British monarchy in the first place? It might seem strange, given the nation's decision to sever ties with George III in 1776. No royal family from any other nation has induced the same level of scrutiny or celebration. It's important to recognize that British royals have been eliciting similar responses on American shores for the past 150 years In 1860, Prince Albert Edward – the future King Edward VII – staged a surprisingly successful American tour, during which he was mobbed by fans in cities including Chicago; Albany, New York; and Detroit. In 1939, King George VI and Queen Elizabeth made similar headlines when they ate their first hot dogs in Hyde Park, New York, urged on by President Roosevelt and his wife, Eleanor. And then there was the frenzy surrounding Prince Charles and Princess Diana's visit to Washington in 1985. President Reagan may have mistakenly referred to Diana as "Princess David," but no one will forget Diana's turn on the dance floor with actor John Travolta. Of course, there's an element of pragmatism in the tradition of warm American receptions. After the American Revolution, the newly independent nation realized that it would need to maintain strong ties with the imperial motherland for diplomatic and security reasons; the War of 1812 proved to be the exception – rather than the rule – in 19th-century Anglo-American relations. This "special relationship" would become only more vital during World War II and the Cold War that followed. President Roosevelt invited George VI to that picnic in 1939 not only to exchange pleasantries, but also to telegraph British and American unity in the face of German belligerence. In 1939, when King George VI and Queen Elizabeth dined on hot dogs at FDR's Hyde Park retreat, the two nations sought to convey a message of unity to the Nazis. The National Archives But the emotion on display during royal visits also suggests a deep affective tie. Although the American revolutionaries long ago rejected colonial government, there has always been a certain degree of ambivalence about the crown. The Colonists, after all, had felt an intense and personal relationship with George III, whom they regarded as distinct from the British Parliament, even as many came to question the concept of hereditary sovereignty. As late as 1775, Alexander Hamilton would defend George III in his "The Farmer Refuted" on the grounds that George III was "king of America, by virtue of a compact between us and the kings of Great Britain." As Hamilton went on to explain, "[T]o disclaim the authority of a British Parliament over us, does by no means imply the dereliction of our allegiance to British Monarchs." In the wake of the Revolution, the routines, symbols, rituals and attitudes associated with the crown proved difficult to sacrifice. These thorny aspects of the transition from colony to nation have been addressed in works by historians and academics Elisa Tamarkin, Brendan J. McConville and, most recently, Eric Nelson. In "The Royalist Revolution," Nelson even goes so far as to suggest, provocatively, that the nation's founders crafted the American presidency with the image of a strong king in mind. Not everyone will buy Nelson's thesis, but there's no denying that Americans have made their own political dynasties: Instead of the Windsors, we have the Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons. In 2018, American actress Meghan Markle went one step further by marrying into the British royal family. Her relationship with the British press – and reportedly with some of her in-laws – hasn't been the smoothest, leading to a move across the Atlantic to the U.S. for her and husband, Prince Harry. But despite that one American's experience, Americans tend to look favorably on the family's head. A February 2022 poll of Americans found that 61% held a favorable view of Queen Elizabeth – the highest rating of any living member of the British royal family. Editor's note: This is an updated version of an article first published on March 20, 2015. Arianne Chernock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

What are digital twins? A pair of computer modeling experts explain Posted: 01 Jun 2022 05:44 AM PDT A digital twin attempts to capture every aspect of a real thing, including up-to-the-moment changes. lambada/E+ via Getty Images A digital twin is a virtual representation of a real system – a building, the power grid, a city, even a human being – that mimics the characteristics of the system. A digital twin is more than just a computer model, however. It receives data from sensors in the real system to constantly parallel the system's state. A digital twin helps people analyze and predict a system's behavior under different conditions. The systems being twinned are typically very complex and require significant effort to model and track. Digital twins are useful in a wide variety of domains, including supply chains, health care, buildings, bridges, self-driving cars and retail customer personas to improve efficiency and reliability. For example, a warehouse operator can optimize a warehouse's performance by exploring the response of its digital twin to various material handling policies and equipment without incurring the cost of making actual changes. Even a wildfire can be represented by a digital twin. Government agencies can predict the spread of the fire and its impact under different conditions such as wind velocity, humidity and proximity to habitats, and use this information to guide evacuations. Why digital twins matter Digital twins are often used to model, understand and analyze complex systems where performance, reliability and security of the system are critical. In such systems it is paramount to test any changes, whether planned or unplanned. In order to accurately test changes to the state of the actual system and the effects of any possible stimulus, the digital twin must accurately represent the physical system in its current state. This requires the digital twin to receive continuous updates from the physical system via fast and reliable communications channels. Digital twins are a key part of the push to create "smart" cities. Creating and maintaining digital twins often involves vast amounts of data to represent various features of the real system. Collecting and processing this data requires advanced communication and computing technologies. Communication support typically involves high-speed internet connections and wireless networks such as Wi-Fi and 5G. Computational support is typically in the form of servers, either in the cloud or closer to the physical system. We and other faculty members at Rochester Institute of Technology and the University of California, Irvine are starting the Center for Smart Spaces Research, a research center sponsored by the National Science Foundation. One of the primary ongoing projects within this center is building the basic technologies for creating digital twins in a variety of applications. Read other short, accessible explanations of newsworthy subjects written by academics in their areas of expertise for The Conversation U.S. here. Amlan Ganguly receives funding from US NSF, DARPA, AFRL, Raymond Corp and Bryx Corp. Nalini Venkatasubramanian receives research funding from the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies

'Masked' cancer drug stealthily trains immune system to kill tumors while sparing healthy tissues, reducing treatment side effects Posted: 01 Jun 2022 05:14 AM PDT Dendritic cells (green) produce cytokines like IL-12, which can train T cells (pink) to attack tumors. Victor Segura Ibarra and Rita Serda/National Cancer Institute via Flickr, CC BY-NC Many cancer treatments are notoriously savage on the body. Drugs often attack both healthy cells and tumor cells, causing a plethora of side effects. Immunotherapies that help the immune system recognize and attack cancer cells are no different. Though they have prolonged the lives of countless patients, they work in only a subset of patients. One study found that fewer than 30% of breast cancer patients respond to one of the most common forms of immunotherapy. But what if drugs could be engineered to attack only tumor cells and spare the rest of the body? To that end, my colleagues and I at the University of Chicago's Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering have designed a method to keep one promising cancer drug from wreaking havoc by "masking" it until it reaches a tumor. Immunotherapies help the immune system recognize and target cancer cells. The promise of IL-12 Cytokines are proteins that can modulate how the immune system responds to threats. One way they do this is by activating killer T cells, a type of white blood cells that can attack cancer cells. Because cytokines can train the immune system to kill tumors, this makes them very promising as cancer treatments. One such cytokine is interleukin-12, or IL-12. Though it was discovered more than 30 years ago, IL-12 still isn't an FDA-approved therapy for cancer patients because of its severe side effects, such as liver damage. This is in part because IL-12 instructs immune cells to produce a large amount of inflammatory molecules that can damage the body. Scientists have since been working to reengineer IL-12 to be more tolerable while retaining its powerful cancer-killing effects. Masking the killer To create a safer version of IL-12, my colleagues and I took advantage of one of the main differences between healthy and cancerous tissue: an excess of growth-promoting enzymes in cancers. Because cancer cells proliferate very rapidly, they overproduce certain enzymes that help them invade the nearby healthy tissue and metastasize to other parts of the body. Healthy cells grow at a much slower pace and produce fewer of these enzymes. With this in mind, we "masked" IL-12 with a cap that covers the part of the molecule that normally binds to immune cells to activate them. The cap is removed only when it comes into contact with enzymes found in the vicinity of tumors. When these enzymes chop off the cap, IL-12 is reactivated and spurs nearby killer T cells to attack the tumor. Killer T cells (green and red) can attach to cancer cells (blue, center) and kill them by releasing toxic chemicals (red), a move scientists have dubbed 'the kiss of death.' NIH/Flickr When we applied these masked IL-12 molecules to both healthy and tumor tissue donated by melanoma and breast cancer patients, our results confirmed that only the tumor samples were able to remove the cap. This indicated that masked IL-12 could potentially drive a strong immune response against tumors without causing damage to healthy organs. We then examined how safe masked IL-12 is by measuring liver damage biomarkers in mice. We found that immune-related side effects typically associated with IL-12 were notably absent in mice treated with masked IL-12 over a period of several weeks, indicating improved safety. In breast cancer models, our masked IL-12 resulted in a 90% cure rate, while treatment with a commonly used immunotherapy called a checkpoint inhibitor resulted in only a 10% cure rate. In a model of colon cancer, masked IL-12 showed a 100% cure rate. Our next step is to test the modified IL-12 in cancer patients. While it will take time to bring this encouraging development directly to patients, we believe a promising new treatment is on the horizon. Aslan Mansurov consults to and owns shares in Arrow Immune Inc, which is developing the technology presented in the article.

Modern-day struggle at James Madison's plantation Montpelier to include the descendants' voices of the enslaved Posted: 01 Jun 2022 05:13 AM PDT Reconstructed slave cabins at James Madison's Montpelier in Virginia. Stephen P. Hanna, Author provided On May 17, 2022, after weeks of negative stories on Montpelier in the national press, the foundation that operates the Virginia plantation home of James Madison finally made good on its promise to share authority with descendants of people enslaved by the man known as "the father" of the U.S. Constitution. This agreement is the result of a long struggle by this descendant community to make enslaved people more prominent in the history Montpelier offers the public. Though presidential plantation museums began addressing the topic of enslavement over 20 years ago, descendants were not given power over their ancestors' stories. In 2018, provoked by years of slavery's being taught in erroneous ways, a summit of educators, museum professionals and descendants gathered at Montpelier to define a set of best practices for how historic sites should work with descendant communities. Ensuring that enslaved people's descendants have power and authority within these institutions is central to the guide. Working toward that goal in 2021, Montpelier announced a historic agreement giving descendants equal representation on its board of directors. These innovations made Montpelier a leader in slavery interpretation. But that status was threatened earlier this year when Montpelier dissolved its power-sharing agreement with the descendant community. The foundation's chairman said the board "has found the committee (representing descendants) difficult to work with." Montpelier also fired senior staff who protested this decision, accusing them of speaking "disparagingly, even hatefully, of the volunteer Board that governs this historic American Treasure." A firestorm of protest erupted. Thousands signed petitions urging Montpelier to live up to its promise to work with the descendants. The National Trust for Historic Preservation, which owns Montpelier, stated that the foundation's actions "would set back Montpelier's efforts to continue the necessary work of uplifting descendant's voices." Our research at Montpelier and at George Washington's Mount Vernon and Thomas Jefferson's Monticello suggests descendant community involvement with the operations of a site affects what visitors learn about slavery at these museums. As cultural geographers studying how enslavement is presented at historic sites, we realize the importance of creating bonds between visitors and the struggles of enslaved communities at these historic homes. Such bonds help the public understand slavery's role in the lives of the Founding Fathers and in the creation of the American nation. Descendant voices at plantation museums Montpelier, Monticello and Mount Vernon are popular tourist destinations in Virginia where the public can experience, interpret and identify with historical figures and events. Before the pandemic in 2020, staff estimated that each year 125,000 people visited Montpelier, over 400,000 visited Monticello and over 1 million visited Mount Vernon. Some of these visitors find it hard to reconcile the Founding Fathers' contributions to American democracy with their enslavement of Black men, women and children. A crowd waits to tour George Washington's Mount Vernon outside Alexandria, Va. Stephen P. Hanna For most of their histories, presidential sites catered to mostly white visitors by downplaying slavery to maintain the reputations of national heroes. Descendant communities increasingly claim presidential plantations as sites where they can incorporate their historical struggles and contributions into the nation's story. This places them front and center in the ongoing battle over how slavery is remembered at the homes of America's first presidents. Anthropologist Antoinette Jackson argues that descendant community involvement with plantation museums helps the public understand the diversity of Black lives before and after emancipation. Her research also suggests that descendant voices disrupt the long-standing white-centric history told at historic sites that has downplayed the everyday practices of living, resisting and surviving that characterized enslaved communities. Studying visitor experiences To determine the effect that descendant community involvement had on visitor experiences at Montpelier, Monticello and Mount Vernon, we surveyed 1,386 adult visitors when they first arrived in 2019 and 2020. We also documented the three museums' tours and exhibits and surveyed 1,033 adult visitors as they left. The overwhelming majority of visitors – 86% – identified as white, suggestive of how uninviting these sites have been to people of color. On the pre-visit survey, 81% of visitors said they were very to extremely interested in learning about Madison, Jefferson and Washington. In comparison, only 57% said they were very or extremely interested in learning about enslavement. Over 90% of visitors took tours of the presidents' mansions. While enslavement was mentioned on these tours, guides pointed at antique desks and painted portraits to emphasize that Washington, Jefferson and Madison were key players in America's founding. According to staff we interviewed, descendants had little say over the content of mansion tours. Descendant involvement in the sites' slavery tours and exhibits varied across the the three sites. The "Slavery at Monticello" tour included enslaved people's biographies drawn from the oral history project Getting Word, in which descendants shared their stories and those of their ancestors with museum staff. On the tour, guides mention that members of the Fossett family, for instance, purchased their freedom, moved to Cincinnati and helped fugitive slaves find freedom. The Slavery at Monticello Tour. Stephen P. Hanna Panel with audio of Leontyne Peck speaking about her enslaved ancestors at Montpelier. Stephen P. Hanna At Montpelier, descendants helped design "The Mere Distinction of Colour" exhibit. It featured the voices of descendants who connected the facts of slavery in America's past to its legacy in the nation's present. At Mount Vernon, the material presented on tours and exhibits that focused on enslavement was thorough and well researched, but contributions of descendants were not featured as much as at the other two museums. After their visits, people at all three sites reported learning more about Washington, Jefferson and Madison than about enslaved people. They also stated that these three men had a greater impact on the development of the United States than slavery did. These results are not surprising. Visitors arrived more interested in learning about the presidents and almost all took the mansion tours where guides talked more about the Founding Fathers' accomplishments than enslavement. The impact of different voices Between 40% and 70% of surveyed visitors experienced tours or exhibits about enslaved people, but the voices of descendants made visitor experiences at Montpelier and Monticello much different than at Mount Vernon. Forty percent of 140 Montpelier visitors surveyed reported learning a great deal about enslaved people. In comparison, 32% of 389 Monticello respondents and only 16% of 504 Mount Vernon visitors said they learned a great deal. Descendant voices at Montpelier and Monticello also helped visitors understand slavery's impacts on the development of the United States. Fifty-seven percent of respondents at these sites stated that slavery had a great deal of impact on the nation. Only 42% of Mount Vernon visitors said the same. Finally, visitor experiences are influenced by how much they engage emotionally with what is said in museum tours and exhibits. The voices of descendants made a difference in this regard. At Montpelier and Monticello, over 80% said felt more empathy for enslaved people because of their visit. In contrast, just over 70% of Mount Vernon visitors said their empathy increased. Tough choices Presidential sites of the Founding Fathers are popular destinations that help people form their understanding of American history. Their plantations are key elements for the public to put presidential reputations in conversation with the struggles of enslaved people and the voices of their descendants. But as presidential museums try to redress their longtime neglect of enslaved Black people, a few vocal visitors accuse guides of attacking the reputations of the white founders. In our view, museums must be mindful of the roles they play in either reproducing or challenging racial exclusions still found in American understanding of history. Intensive public criticism helped make the Montpelier Foundation choose to challenge such exclusions. On May 25, 2022, the new governing board, half of whose members are now enslaved people's descendants, named Elizabeth Chew as new interim president. Along with two others, Chew had been fired on April 18, 2020, as chief curator of the presidential home. While accepting the new position she said, "We must embrace history's complexity and welcome the leadership of the living voices for those who were silenced here." Stephen P. Hanna is affiliated with American Association of Geographers Amy Potter receives funding from National Science Foundation. Derek H. Alderman receives funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities and is affiliated with the American Association of Geographers..

More student or faculty diversity on campus leads to lower racial gaps in graduation rates Posted: 01 Jun 2022 05:12 AM PDT At colleges with a majority-Black student population, Black and white students graduate at the same rate. Brittany Murray/MediaNews Group/Long Beach Press-Telegram via Getty Images The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work. The big idea College graduation gaps between Black and white students tend to shrink when there are more students of color or faculty of color on campus. This finding is based on analyses of 2,807 four-year U.S. colleges conducted by psychology researcher Nida Denson and me. Our research appeared as a peer-reviewed article in 2022 in Volume 93, Issue 3, of The Journal of Higher Education. Not only did we find that the gap in graduation rates between Black and white students is smaller at colleges with a larger percentage of Black students or faculty. We also found that the presence of one racial group may lead to smaller graduation gaps for other groups as well. For example, a greater percentage of Black students or instructors often helps shrink the graduation gap between other groups, such as Latino and white students. Our findings were mainly at colleges where almost no students attend online programs. Students in online coursework sometimes know the race of their instructor and other students. However, these racial identities may not be obvious in online courses on a day-to-day basis, especially if students have few chances to interact. In addition, at colleges and universities with a majority-Black student population, Black students have the same graduation rates as white students. This same pattern is also seen for Latino and white students at colleges with a majority-Latino population. Our findings hold even after we took other factors into account, such as how selective the college was, where it was located and how much it cost to attend. Why it matters College graduation rates vary substantially across racial groups. For instance, white students who began attending a four-year college in 2010 graduated within six years at a rate of 63.9%, whereas Black students who began college the same year graduated at a rate of 39.7%, federal data shows. Our research highlights an overlooked reason that may explain some of these gaps: the presence of a large majority of white students and faculty at many colleges. This finding is important, because colleges have some control over the students whom they choose to recruit and admit as well as the faculty they hire. Our finding that majority-Black and majority-Latino colleges have managed to eliminate gaps in graduation rates – despite centuries of past and present racism that affect student outcomes – is also notable. Some of these colleges have a founding mission of supporting students of color, such as historically Black colleges and universities, which were originally created for Black students who were prevented from attending white colleges. Others have a large percentage of students of color without this type of history, such as California State University, Fresno. Receiving a college degree provides benefits in terms of future employment, income, mental well-being, physical health and civic participation. Additionally, a well-educated population provides economic, health and civic benefits to society overall. Therefore, promoting equitable graduation rates serves as one critical step in the effort toward creating a more racially just society. Future research is needed to better understand how and why the presence of students and faculty of color may lead to equitable graduation rates. Moreover, colleges and universities may want to bolster their efforts to hire faculty of color to improve their students' outcomes. What still isn't known While this study shows that higher percentages of students and faculty of color tend to close racial gaps in graduation rates, it does not explain how this happens. This closing of gaps may occur from students of color feeling comfort when seeing other people of color on campus, having more interactions and friendships with students of color, or experiencing more inclusive classroom environments with faculty members of color. Nicholas A. Bowman receives funding from Western Sydney University (WSU) School of Social Sciences and Psychology.

How the role and visibility of chaplains changed over the past century Posted: 01 Jun 2022 05:08 AM PDT A chaplain prays for a COVID-19 patient in Los Angeles while on a video call with the patient's daughter in November 2020. AP Photo/Jae C. Hong The COVID-19 pandemic brought new attention to the work of chaplains. Before the pandemic, as an article in The New York Times put it, the place of the hospital chaplain was "at the bedside, holding a patient's hand, counseling them and their family members, singing with them, crying with them, hugging them, offering the eucharist, or a prayer for healing." As the pandemic unfolded, the work of chaplains – increasingly called spiritual care providers – changed. Some were declared essential employees and continued to work in person, but they were not allowed into rooms with COVID-19 patients. They offered words of encouragement and solace through baby monitors and posters taped to patients' doors. COVID-19 also shifted the work of hospital chaplains from focusing primarily on patients to bridging the gap between dying patients and their distanced family members. Many helped family members at home connect to hospitalized loved ones by phone, FaceTime, Zoom and other technologies. Some chaplains started rolling carts of treats and pick-me-ups for hospital staff to promote self-care and prevent burnout. A national survey conducted in 2019 found that 21% of the American public had contact with a chaplain in the past two years. Of those encounters, 57% took place in a health care setting. Other encounters happened in places like the military, higher education, and more. As scholars of American religion and spirituality, we know that chaplains have long histories in health care organizations and have been visible over time to varying degrees. The origins of modern spiritual care Chaplaincy emerged as a professional field in the mid-20th century out of Protestant efforts to reform theological education. Concerned about the growing influence of psychology and psychiatry in matters previously understood only as spiritual, Protestant theological leaders in the 1920s sought to get students out of classrooms and into real-life situations where they would learn to respond to the challenges and struggles people face in their daily lives. In hospital settings before the 1920s, chaplains were retired or volunteer clergy with no special training. They visited patients in their own religious traditions alongside other volunteers. Religiously founded hospitals also frequently had priests, ministers or rabbis in service, reflecting the hospital's religious affiliation. Many nurses offered religious support at the bedside, rooted in their own religious commitments. In the mid-19th century, Florence Nightingale, who rose to prominence from her service to soldiers in the Crimean War, saw both to patients' spiritual and physical needs. Training in the field As theological educators worked to reform Protestant theological education in the 1920s, they formalized Clinical Pastoral Education, or CPE. Initially pioneered by a leading chaplain, Anton Boisen, and supported by Richard Cabot, a physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, CPE students completed internships in hospitals that supplemented their classroom training. Boisen viewed patients as "living human documents" from which to learn. CPE students in later years wrote "verbatims," or reports of conversations they had with patients. While most people who completed units of CPE did not go on to become chaplains, a few did. By the 1940s, those who wanted to work in hospitals based on their CPE training started to organize themselves as a distinct professional group. Unlike retired clergy, who mostly made short visits and offered rituals, CPE-trained clergy worked from referrals and connections with hospital staff, made care plans based on the severity of a patient's illness, documented their visits and were accountable to someone within the hospital. Data collected by the American Hospital Association suggested that two-thirds of American hospitals had a chaplain by the mid-1950s, though it is not clear how many were CPE-trained. The development of chaplaincy as a profession distinct from that of local clergy was also supported by the extensive work of military chaplains on the front lines during World War II and their subsequent memorialization in American public life, such as Chaplains Hill at Arlington National Cemetery. Chaplains in military settings rose to such prominence in the American mind that one who served in the Korean War, Emil Kapaun, is now being considered for sainthood in the Catholic Church for his service to fellow prisoners of war. The priest died in the Pyoktong POW camp in May 1951. U.S. Air Force Chaplain Stephan Borlang reads his Bible in a makeshift chapel in Mogadishu, Somalia, in 1992. AP Photo/Lynne Sladky Initially chaplains were almost all white Protestant men, but the demographics changed slowly through the 20th century. The National Association of Catholic Chaplains was founded in 1965 and the National Association of Jewish Chaplains, now known as Neshama, in 1990. Growing numbers of women and people of color began to enter the field toward the end of the 20th century, and more health care providers began to pay attention to the role of religion and spirituality in patients' experiences. About two-thirds of hospitals have chaplains today, which include growing numbers of Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu and other non-Christian chaplains. In the 1990s, theological schools began to develop specific degree programs in chaplaincy and spiritual care, rather than expecting chaplains to train for congregational service and then figure out on their own how to apply their training to other settings. More than a quarter of theological or rabbinical schools currently have such programs, with some designed specifically for Buddhists, Muslims and people from other non-Christian religious backgrounds. All chaplains today need basic training in caring for people that includes understanding how individuals make meaning, the interpersonal skills necessary to care for people from different backgrounds, and navigating the complexity of organizations in which they work. What chaplains really do Health care chaplains talk a lot about presence when describing their work, which is increasingly based on the results of empirical research. Presence means everything from casual conversation with patients and families to mediating conflicts between patients, families and care teams. It can also mean offering prayer or other explicitly religious service, and listening to patients' deepest fears, religious or otherwise. Research about the effects of chaplains' work has expanded significantly in recent years and shows that individuals who are visited by chaplains are more satisfied with their hospital stays and often have improved outcomes. Many chaplains reported serving expanding roles during the pandemic and having found increased visibility among hospital staff. Some noted a greater sense of appreciation and knowledge among staff of what chaplains do. Chaplains aim to continue care of hospital staff through educational programs, among others. As religious demographics continue to shift in the United States and growing numbers of people are not religiously affiliated, the work of health care chaplains will continue to change. Wendy Cadge receives funding from The Fetzer Institute, the Templeton Religion Trust, and the Henry Luce Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation. She is the founder of the Chaplaincy Innovation Lab. Michael Skaggs receives receives funding from The Fetzer Institute, the Templeton Religion Trust, and the Henry Luce Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and ACPE: The Standard for Spiritual Care and Education. He is a co-founder and Director of Programs of the Chaplaincy Innovation Lab.

Firearm stocks spike after mass shootings as investors dismiss the chance of tightening gun laws Posted: 31 May 2022 02:23 PM PDT Trading on tragedy. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images. The day after an armed 18-year-old entered the Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and shot dead 19 children and two teachers, the share prices of gun and weapons manufacturers jumped. A week on, and the market rally of gun stocks following the latest mass shooting hasn't subsided. As of the close of trading on May 31, 2022, the stock price of weapons-maker Sturm Ruger was up more than 6.6% since May 23, the day before the shooting. For Smith & Wesson, the jump was even more marked, with shares up over 12% from the stock price prior to the mass killing in Uvalde. But that relationship – a mass shooting followed by a spike in gun industry stocks – wasn't always the case. My colleague Anand Gopal and I studied the impact of 93 mass shootings on the stock price of publicly listed firms from 2009 to 2013. We found that, contrary to what happens now, mass shootings in that period were followed by a drop in share price for Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger, the two gun companies still publicly listed in the U.S. So why has that changed? The answer may lie in how hopes of legislation over tighter restrictions on gun sales have dwindled over the last decade. The takeaway is investors no longer seem to worry so much about the chances of tightening firearms regulation when assessing the long-term viability of gun manufacturers in the aftermath of mass shootings. Let's look at the factors that influence the valuation of such stocks after mass shootings. First you have increasing demand for weapons. Research has shown that gun sales go up after a high-profile shooting as Americans "arm up," both out of a perceived concern for their safety and fear of tighter restrictions. The thinking is simple: "I better buy firearms while I still can, before legislation makes it harder for me to do so." This increased demand would, on its own, spur the market price of gun and ammunition manufacturers by providing an unanticipated financial windfall. But then you have the counter factor: Any talk of tighter rules on gun sales puts at risk the long-term viability of the companies by curtailing future cash flows. The business model of gun-makers, after all, is to sell increasing numbers of firearms to the public. Any ban or restrictions on what types of weapon you can purchase – or even who can buy a firearm – would limit their ability to increase profits. In the period we looked at, investors seemed to lean into this fear of future legislation more, as seen in the reduced valuation of publicly listed firearm companies after mass shootings. Our research showed that the mass shootings from 2009 to 2013 resulted in a penalty imposed on firearms stocks over a two-, five- and 10-day window. That is to say, a mass shooting would be followed by a cumulative abnormal drop in share price over that period. The penalty worked out to around 1.25% over a five-day period. Interestingly, even over the years we looked at, things began to change. The negative stock market response to mass shootings tapered off in the later years of our study, suggesting that the threat of any regulatory measures was not as keenly felt by investors. Inaction over gun control at the federal level – and the loosening of regulations among some states – in the years since our work has seemingly led to a rebalancing of the two main factors at play. Yes, there is still the surge of demand for gun sales after mass shootings. But the fear over potential regulations over gun sales has seemingly abated. The surge in the stock price of Smith & Wesson and Sturm Ruger after the Uvalde school shooting provides strong correlational evidence that firearm stocks now rise after such events. A similar effect was seen after the 2018 mass shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. But there is a problem when it comes to saying outright that there is a link. One of the scariest things is the statistical model we used in our research no longer works. The reason: There are simply too many mass shootings in the U.S. They occur with such frequency that we can no longer implement this kind of analysis looking at the effect of isolated incidents and the stock market effect on gun companies. In fact, according to the Gun Violence Archive, there were 18 more mass shootings in the U.S. in the seven days after the Uvalde shooting. Brad Greenwood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

You are subscribed to email updates from Home – The Conversation. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States