Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alex Hinton, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights, Rutgers University – Newark

With the latest shift by President Donald Trump on releasing the Epstein files held by the U.S. Department of Justice – he’s now for it after being against it after being for it – the MAGA base may finally get to view the documents it’s long wanted to see. On the afternoon of Nov. 18, 2025, the House voted overwhelmingly to seek release of the files, with only one Republican voting against the measure. The Senate later in the day agreed unanimously to pass the measure and send it on to the president for his signature. The Conversation’s politics editor, Naomi Schalit, talked with scholar Alex Hinton, who has studied MAGA for years, about Make America Great Again Republicans’ sustained interest in the case of accused child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Hinton explains how MAGA’s interest in the case fits into what he knows about the group of die-hard Trump supporters.

You are an expert on MAGA. How do you learn what you know about MAGA?

I’m a cultural anthropologist, and what we do is field work. We go where the people we’re studying live, act, talk. We observe and sort of hang out and see what happens. We listen and then we unpack themes. We try and understand the meaning systems that undergird whatever group we’re studying. And then, of course, there’s interviewing.

It appears that MAGA, Trump’s core supporters, are very concerned about various aspects of the Epstein story, including the release of documents that are in the possession of the U.S. government. Are they, in fact, concerned about this?

The answer is yes, but there’s also a sort of “no” implicit, too. We need to back up and think, first of all, what is MAGA.

I think of it as what we call in anthropology a nativist movement, a foregrounding of the people in the land. And this is where you get America First discourse. It’s also xenophobic, meaning that there’s a fear of outsiders, invaders coming in. It’s populist, so it’s something that’s sort of for the people.

Tucker Carlson interviewed Marjorie Taylor Greene, and he said, “I’m going to go over the five pillars of MAGA.” Those were America First, this is absolutely central. Borders was the second. You’ve got to secure the borders. The third was globalist antipathy, or a recognition that globalization has failed. Another one was free speech, and another one he mentioned was no more foreign wars. And I would add into that an emphasis on “we the people” versus elites.

Each of those is interwoven with a key dynamic to MAGA, which is conspiracy theory. And those conspiracy theories are usually anti-elite, going back to we the people.

If you look at Epstein, he’s where many of the conspiracy theories converge: Stop the Steal, The Big Lie, lawfare, deep state, replacement theory. Epstein kind of hits all of these, that there’s this elite cabal that’s orchestrating things that ultimately are against the interests of we the people, with a sort of antisemitic strain to this. And in particular, if we go back to Pizzagate in 2016, this conspiracy theory that there were these Democratic elitists who were, you know, demonic forces who were sex trafficking, and lo and behold, here’s Epstein doing precisely that.

There’s kind of a bucket of these things, and Epstein is more in it than not in it?

He’s all over it. He’s been there, you know, from the beginning, because he’s elite and they believe he’s doing sex trafficking. And then there’s a suspicion of the deep state, of the government, and this means cover-ups. What was MAGA promised? Trump said, we’re going to give you the goods, right? Kash Patel, Pam Bondi, everyone said we’re going to tell you this stuff. And it sure smacks of a cover-up, if you just look at it.

But the bottom line is there’s a realization among many people in MAGA that you’ve got to stay with Trump. It’s too much to say there is no MAGA without Trump. There’s certainly no Trumpism without Trump, but MAGA without Trump would be like the tea party. It’ll just sort of fade away without Trump.

People in MAGA are supporting Trump more than more mainstream Republicans on this. So I don’t think there’s going to be a break over this, but it certainly adds strain. And you can see in the current moment that Trump is under some strain.

The break that we are seeing is Trump breaking with one of his leading MAGA supporters, Marjorie Taylor Greene, not the MAGA supporter breaking with Trump.

With Greene, sometimes it’s like a yo-yo in a relationship with Trump. You fall apart, you have tension, and then you sort of get back. Elon Musk was a little bit like that. You have this breakup, and now she’s sort of backtracking like Elon Musk did. I don’t think what is happening is indicative of a larger fracturing that’s going to take place with MAGA.

It seems that Trump did his about-face on releasing the documents so that MAGA doesn’t have to break with him.

It’s absolutely true. He’s incredible at taking any story and turning it in his direction. He’s sort of like a chess player, unless he blurts something out. He’s a couple of moves ahead of wherever, whatever’s running, and so in a way we’re always behind, and he knows where we are. It’s incredible that he’s able to do this.

There’s one other thing about MAGA. I think of it as “don’t cross the boss.” It’s this sort of overzealous love of Trump that has to be expressed, and literally no one ever crosses the boss in these contexts. You toe the line, and if you go against the line, you know what happened to Marjorie Taylor Greene, there’s the threat Trump is going to disown you. You’re going to get primaried.

Trump has probably made a brilliant strategic move, which is suddenly to say, “I’m all for releasing it. It’s actually the Democrats who are these evil elites, and now we’re going to investigate Bill Clinton and all these other Democrats.” He takes over the narrative, he knows how to do it, and it’s intentional. Whoever says Trump is not charismatic, he doesn’t make sense – Trump is highly charismatic. He can move a crowd. He knows what he’s doing. Never underestimate him.

Does MAGA care about girls who were sexually abused?

There is concern, you know, especially among the devout Christians in MAGA, for whom sex trafficking is a huge issue.

I think if you look at sort of notions of Christian morality, it also goes to notions of sort of innocence, being afflicted by demonic forces. And it’s an attack on we the people by those elites; it’s a violation of rights. I mean, who isn’t horrified by the idea of sex trafficking? But again, especially in the Christian circles, this is a huge issue.

Alex Hinton receives funding from the Rutgers-Newark Sheila Y. Oliver Center for Politics and Race in America, Rutgers Research Council, and Henry Frank Guggenheim Foundation.

– ref. Why MAGA is so concerned with Epstein − and why the files are unlikely to dent loyalty to Trump – https://theconversation.com/why-maga-is-so-concerned-with-epstein-and-why-the-files-are-unlikely-to-dent-loyalty-to-trump-270109

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Morgan Underwood, Ph.D. Candidate in Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Rice University

When astronomers search for planets that could host liquid water on their surface, they start by looking at a star’s habitable zone. Water is a key ingredient for life, and on a planet too close to its star, water on its surface may “boil”; too far, and it could freeze. This zone marks the region in between.

But being in this sweet spot doesn’t automatically mean a planet is hospitable to life. Other factors, like whether a planet is geologically active or has processes that regulate gases in its atmosphere, play a role.

The habitable zone provides a useful guide to search for signs of life on exoplanets – planets outside our solar system orbiting other stars. But what’s in these planets’ atmospheres holds the next clue about whether liquid water — and possibly life — exists beyond Earth.

On Earth, the greenhouse effect, caused by gases like carbon dioxide and water vapor, keeps the planet warm enough for liquid water and life as we know it. Without an atmosphere, Earth’s surface temperature would average around zero degrees Fahrenheit (minus 18 degrees Celsius), far below the freezing point of water.

The boundaries of the habitable zone are defined by how much of a “greenhouse effect” is necessary to maintain the surface temperatures that allow for liquid water to persist. It’s a balance between sunlight and atmospheric warming.

Many planetary scientists, including me, are seeking to understand if the processes responsible for regulating Earth’s climate are operating on other habitable zone worlds. We use what we know about Earth’s geology and climate to predict how these processes might appear elsewhere, which is where my geoscience expertise comes in.

Why the habitable zone?

The habitable zone is a simple and powerful idea, and for good reason. It provides a starting point, directing astronomers to where they might expect to find planets with liquid water, without needing to know every detail about the planet’s atmosphere or history.

Its definition is partially informed by what scientists know about Earth’s rocky neighbors. Mars, which lies just outside the outer edge of the habitable zone, shows clear evidence of ancient rivers and lakes where liquid water once flowed.

Similarly, Venus is currently too close to the Sun to be within the habitable zone. Yet, some geochemical evidence and modeling studies suggest Venus may have had water in its past, though how much and for how long remains uncertain.

These examples show that while the habitable zone is not a perfect predictor of habitability, it provides a useful starting point.

Planetary processes can inform habitability

What the habitable zone doesn’t do is determine whether a planet can sustain habitable conditions over long periods of time. On Earth, a stable climate allowed life to emerge and persist. Liquid water could remain on the surface, giving slow chemical reactions enough time to build the molecules of life and let early ecosystems develop resilience to change, which reinforced habitability.

Life emerged on Earth, but continued to reshape the environments it evolved in, making them more conducive to life.

This stability likely unfolded over hundreds of millions of years, as the planet’s surface, oceans and atmosphere worked together as part of a slow but powerful system to regulate Earth’s temperature.

A key part of this system is how Earth recycles inorganic carbon between the atmosphere, surface and oceans over the course of millions of years. Inorganic carbon refers to carbon bound in atmospheric gases, dissolved in seawater or locked in minerals, rather than biological material. This part of the carbon cycle acts like a natural thermostat. When volcanoes release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the carbon dioxide molecules trap heat and warm the planet. As temperatures rise, rain and weathering draw carbon out of the air and store it in rocks and oceans.

If the planet cools, this process slows down, allowing carbon dioxide, a warming greenhouse gas, to build up in the atmosphere again. This part of the carbon cycle has helped Earth recover from past ice ages and avoid runaway warming.

Even as the Sun has gradually brightened, this cycle has contributed to keeping temperatures on Earth within a range where liquid water and life can persist for long spans of time.

Now, scientists are asking whether similar geological processes might operate on other planets, and if so, how they might detect them. For example, if researchers could observe enough rocky planets in their stars’ habitable zones, they could look for a pattern connecting the amount of sunlight a planet receives and how much carbon dioxide is in its atmosphere. Finding such a pattern may hint that the same kind of carbon-cycling process could be operating elsewhere.

The mix of gases in a planet’s atmosphere is shaped by what’s happening on or below its surface. One study shows that measuring atmospheric carbon dioxide in a number of rocky planets could reveal whether their surfaces are broken into a number of moving plates, like Earth’s, or if their crusts are more rigid. On Earth, these shifting plates drive volcanism and rock weathering, which are key to carbon cycling.

Keeping an eye on distant atmospheres

The next step will be toward gaining a population-level perspective of planets in their stars’ habitable zones. By analyzing atmospheric data from many rocky planets, researchers can look for trends that reveal the influence of underlying planetary processes, such as the carbon cycle.

Scientists could then compare these patterns with a planet’s position in the habitable zone. Doing so would allow them to test whether the zone accurately predicts where habitable conditions are possible, or whether some planets maintain conditions suitable for liquid water beyond the zone’s edges.

This kind of approach is especially important given the diversity of exoplanets. Many exoplanets fall into categories that don’t exist in our solar system — such as super Earths and mini Neptunes. Others orbit stars smaller and cooler than the Sun.

The datasets needed to explore and understand this diversity are just on the horizon. NASA’s upcoming Habitable Worlds Observatory will be the first space telescope designed specifically to search for signs of habitability and life on planets orbiting other stars. It will directly image Earth-sized planets around Sun-like stars to study their atmospheres in detail.

Instruments on the observatory will analyze starlight passing through these atmospheres to detect gases like carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor and oxygen. As starlight filters through a planet’s atmosphere, different molecules absorb specific wavelengths of light, leaving behind a chemical fingerprint that reveals which gases are present. These compounds offer insight into the processes shaping these worlds.

The Habitable Worlds Observatory is under active scientific and engineering development, with a potential launch targeted for the 2040s. Combined with today’s telescopes, which are increasingly capable of observing atmospheres of Earth-sized worlds, scientists may soon be able to determine whether the same planetary processes that regulate Earth’s climate are common throughout the galaxy, or uniquely our own.

Morgan Underwood receives funding from NASA-funded CLEVER Planets (Cycles of Life-Essential Volatile Elements in Rocky Planets) research project.

– ref. Beyond the habitable zone: Exoplanet atmospheres are the next clue to finding life on planets orbiting distant stars – https://theconversation.com/beyond-the-habitable-zone-exoplanet-atmospheres-are-the-next-clue-to-finding-life-on-planets-orbiting-distant-stars-267498

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Shannon Gibson, Professor of Environmental Studies, Political Science and International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

When Hurricane Melissa tore through the Caribbean in October 2025, it left a trail of destruction. The Category 5 storm damaged buildings in Jamaica, Haiti and Cuba, snapped power lines and cut off entire neighborhoods from hospitals and aid.

Jamaica’s regional tourism, fishing and agriculture industries – still recovering from Hurricane Beryl a year earlier – were crippled.

Melissa’s damage has been estimated at US$6 billion to $7 billion in Jamaica alone, about 30% of the island nation’s gross domestic product. While the country has a disaster risk plan designed to help it quickly raise several hundred million dollars, the damage from Melissa far exceeds that amount.

Whether Caribbean nations can recover from Melissa’s destruction and adapt to future climate change risks without taking on debilitating debt will depend in part on a big global promise: climate finance.

Developed countries that grew wealthy from burning fossil fuels, the leading driver of climate change, have pledged billions of dollars a year to help ecologically vulnerable nations like Jamaica, Haiti and Cuba adapt to rising seas and stronger storms and rebuild after disasters worsened by climate change.

In 2024, they committed to boost climate finance from $100 billion a year to at least $300 billion a year by 2035, and to work toward $1.3 trillion annually from a wide spectrum of public and private sources.

But if the world is pouring billions into climate finance, why are developing countries still struggling with recovery costs?

I study the dynamics of global environmental and climate politics, including the United Nations climate negotiations, and my lab has been following the climate money.

Governments at the U.N. climate conference in Brazil have been negotiating a plan to get closer to $1.3 trillion by 2035 and make it easier for developing countries to access funds. But the world’s climate finance so far has rested on a shaky foundation of fuzzy accounting, one where funding for airports, hotels and even ice cream stores is being counted as climate finance.

Cooking the climate finance books

Wealthy nations first promised in 2009 to raise $100 billion a year in climate finance for developing countries by 2020. Whether they hit that target in 2022, as claimed, is up for debate.

Researchers have found many cases where the reported numbers were inflated, largely due to relabeling of general aid that was already being provided and calling it “climate aid.”

The United Kingdom, for example, claims it is on track to meet its £11.6 billion (about $15.2 billion) pledge, but it is doing so in part by reclassifying existing humanitarian and development aid as “climate finance.”

This practice undermines the principle of additionality – the idea that climate finance should represent “new and additional” resources beyond traditional aid, and not simply be a new label on funds already planned for other purposes.

An analysis by the climate news site Carbon Brief suggests that to truly meet its target, the U.K. would need to provide 78% more than it currently does.

The U.K.’s “creative accounting” is not a one-off.

The Center for Global Development estimates that at least one-third of the new public climate funds in 2022 actually came from existing aid budgets. In some cases, the money had been shifted to climate adaptation projects, but often development projects were relabeled as “climate finance.”

What’s counted as climate finance comes from a mix of sources and is predominantly provided through loans and grants. Some funding is bilateral, flowing directly from one country to another. Some is multilateral and distributed through organizations such as the World Bank or the Green Climate Fund that are funded by the world’s governments. Money from private investors and corporations can also count in this growing but fragmented system.

Countries providing the assistance have been able to stretch the definition of climate finance so they can count almost any project, including some that have little to do with reducing emissions or helping communities adapt.

Fossil fuels, hotels and ice cream stores

When it comes to climate finance, the devil is in the project details.

Take Japan, for example. In 2020, its state-backed Japan Bank for International Cooperation used an environmental fund to finance a 1,200-megawatt coal plant in central Vietnam. That power plant will emit far more air pollution than Japan would allow for a power plant within its own borders.

The same bank labeled an airport expansion in Egypt as “eco-friendly” because it included solar panels and LED lights.

In some cases, these projects increase greenhouse gas emissions, rather than lowering them.

For instance, Japan funded an airport expansion in Papua New Guinea that it labeled as climate finance because it was expected to reduce fuel use. However, an analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation, used in Reuters’ analysis, found that if the airport meets passenger targets in its first three years, emissions from outbound flights will rise by an estimated 90% over 2013 levels.

Similarly, Italy claimed $4.7 million as climate finance for helping a chocolate and ice cream company expand into Asia by saying that the project had a “climate component.” And the U.S. counted a $19.5 million Marriott Hotel development in Haiti as “climate finance” because the hotel project included stormwater control and hurricane protection measures.

These are not isolated examples. Reuters reviewed climate finance documents it received from 27 countries and found that at least $3 billion labeled as climate finance went to projects that had little or nothing to do with fighting or recovering from climate change. That included movie financing, coal plant construction and crime prevention programs.

For many of these projects, the money comes in the form of loans, which means the developed country that provided the loan will make money off the interest.

Why fixing climate finance matters

A central test for the success of international climate talks will be whether governments can finally agree on a shared definition of “climate finance,” one that protects the interests of vulnerable countries and avoids creating long-term debt.

Without that clear definition, donor countries can continue to count marginal or loosely related investments as climate finance.

There are plenty of examples that show how targeted climate finance can help vulnerable countries cut emissions, adapt to rising risks and recover from climate-driven disasters. It has helped saved lives in Bangladesh with early warning systems and storm shelters, and improved crop resistance to worsening drought in Kenya, among other projects.

But when governments and banks count existing development projects and fossil fuel upgrades as “climate investments,” the result is an illusion of progress while developing countries face worsening climate risks. At the same time, wealthy countries are still spending hundreds of billions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies, which further drive climate change.

For countries from Jamaica and Bangladesh to the Maldives, the threats from climate change are existential. Every misreported or “creatively counted” climate finance dollar means slower recovery, lost livelihoods and longer waits for clean water and electricity after the next storm.

University of Southern California environmental science students Nickole Aguilar Cortes and Brandon Kim contributed to this article.

Shannon Gibson 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.

– ref. How climate finance to help poor countries became a global shell game – donors have counted fossil fuel projects, airports and even ice cream shops – https://theconversation.com/how-climate-finance-to-help-poor-countries-became-a-global-shell-game-donors-have-counted-fossil-fuel-projects-airports-and-even-ice-cream-shops-268764

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Shiri Melumad, Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of Pennsylvania

Since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022, millions of people have started using large language models to access knowledge. And it’s easy to understand their appeal: Ask a question, get a polished synthesis and move on – it feels like effortless learning.

However, a new paper I co-authored offers experimental evidence that this ease may come at a cost: When people rely on large language models to summarize information on a topic for them, they tend to develop shallower knowledge about it compared to learning through a standard Google search.

Co-author Jin Ho Yun and I, both professors of marketing, reported this finding in a paper based on seven studies with more than 10,000 participants. Most of the studies used the same basic paradigm: Participants were asked to learn about a topic – such as how to grow a vegetable garden – and were randomly assigned to do so by using either an LLM like ChatGPT or the “old-fashioned way,” by navigating links using a standard Google search.

No restrictions were put on how they used the tools; they could search on Google as long as they wanted and could continue to prompt ChatGPT if they felt they wanted more information. Once they completed their research, they were then asked to write advice to a friend on the topic based on what they learned.

The data revealed a consistent pattern: People who learned about a topic through an LLM versus web search felt that they learned less, invested less effort in subsequently writing their advice, and ultimately wrote advice that was shorter, less factual and more generic. In turn, when this advice was presented to an independent sample of readers, who were unaware of which tool had been used to learn about the topic, they found the advice to be less informative, less helpful, and they were less likely to adopt it.

We found these differences to be robust across a variety of contexts. For example, one possible reason LLM users wrote briefer and more generic advice is simply that the LLM results exposed users to less eclectic information than the Google results. To control for this possibility, we conducted an experiment where participants were exposed to an identical set of facts in the results of their Google and ChatGPT searches. Likewise, in another experiment we held constant the search platform – Google – and varied whether participants learned from standard Google results or Google’s AI Overview feature.

The findings confirmed that, even when holding the facts and platform constant, learning from synthesized LLM responses led to shallower knowledge compared to gathering, interpreting and synthesizing information for oneself via standard web links.

Why it matters

Why did the use of LLMs appear to diminish learning? One of the most fundamental principles of skill development is that people learn best when they are actively engaged with the material they are trying to learn.

When we learn about a topic through Google search, we face much more “friction”: We must navigate different web links, read informational sources, and interpret and synthesize them ourselves.

While more challenging, this friction leads to the development of a deeper, more original mental representation of the topic at hand. But with LLMs, this entire process is done on the user’s behalf, transforming learning from a more active to passive process.

What’s next?

To be clear, we do not believe the solution to these issues is to avoid using LLMs, especially given the undeniable benefits they offer in many contexts. Rather, our message is that people simply need to become smarter or more strategic users of LLMs – which starts by understanding the domains wherein LLMs are beneficial versus harmful to their goals.

Need a quick, factual answer to a question? Feel free to use your favorite AI co-pilot. But if your aim is to develop deep and generalizable knowledge in an area, relying on LLM syntheses alone will be less helpful.

As part of my research on the psychology of new technology and new media, I am also interested in whether it’s possible to make LLM learning a more active process. In another experiment we tested this by having participants engage with a specialized GPT model that offered real-time web links alongside its synthesized responses. There, however, we found that once participants received an LLM summary, they weren’t motivated to dig deeper into the original sources. The result was that the participants still developed shallower knowledge compared to those who used standard Google.

Building on this, in my future research I plan to study generative AI tools that impose healthy frictions for learning tasks – specifically, examining which types of guardrails or speed bumps most successfully motivate users to actively learn more beyond easy, synthesized answers. Such tools would seem particularly critical in secondary education, where a major challenge for educators is how best to equip students to develop foundational reading, writing and math skills while also preparing for a real world where LLMs are likely to be an integral part of their daily lives.

The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

Shiri Melumad 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.

– ref. Learning with AI falls short compared to old-fashioned web search – https://theconversation.com/learning-with-ai-falls-short-compared-to-old-fashioned-web-search-269760

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By William Cornwell, Associate Professor of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

The life and political legacy of former Vice President Dick Cheney, who died on Nov. 4, 2025, at the age of 84, has been well documented. But his decades-long battle with heart disease may be less appreciated.

Cheney benefited from almost every major advance made in cardiovascular medicine. These breakthroughs enabled him to sustain an active political career and gave him additional years of an enjoyable life after he moved away from the political spotlight.

As a cardiologist who specializes in both sports medicine and heart disease, as well as advanced heart failure and transplant cardiology, I frequently provide care for patients who, like Cheney, are supported by powerful medicines and procedures to help support heart function.

Cheney’s passing provides an opportunity to reflect on the rapid evolution in medical technology, especially in the past half-century, that improved the lifespan and overall quality of life for Cheney, as well as millions of heart patients around the world.

The formative days of cardiac medicine

Cheney suffered his first of five heart attacks at age 37, in 1978, when the standard of care mainly involved pain relief and bed rest, and when medical professionals did not yet have a clear understanding of what causes heart attacks in the first place.

Today, doctors understand that a heart attack occurs when blood flow through an artery is blocked by a blood clot called a thrombus and oxygen cannot get to the heart muscle. Imagine a kink in a hose that prevents water passing through it. When the heart muscle does not receive oxygen for a long enough period of time, the heart muscle will die and a scar will form.

In the 1960s and ’70s, however, doctors thought a thrombus was the result of – not the cause of – a heart attack.

It is now clear that the formation of a thrombus leads to a heart attack rather than the other way around. That important lesson revolutionized the way doctors like me treat patients with heart attacks.

Big and small breakthroughs

Today, we reopen arteries with stents. When stents are not available, we use powerful medications called thrombolytics, or clot-busters, to break down the thrombus. These kinds of treatments seem commonplace today, but it wasn’t until 1988 that a pivotal study showed combining aspirin and streptokinase, a clot-buster drug, improved survival after a heart attack by almost 50%.

Cheney had additional heart attacks in 1984, 1988, 2000 and 2010. Notably, all but the last were during election years, underscoring the detrimental effects of stress on heart health. His heart attack in 2000 occurred as the courts worked to determine whether Al Gore or George W. Bush – with whom Cheney would become vice president – had won the presidential election.

As technology advanced over the years, Cheney had multiple angioplasties – a procedure to open up narrowed or blocked arteries. During an angioplasty, a procedure developed in the 1980s, heart doctors would place a balloon made of flexible polymers inside an artery to open up and clear the thrombus.

While angioplasties were helpful, one of the main limitations was that the walls of the artery would quickly shrink back – known as recoiling – after the balloon was deflated.

How stents became mainstream

That limitation led to the concept of stents – devices that are now frequently used to treat heart attack patients.

Cheney’s first heart attack in 1978 occurred well before the first stents became available.

Stents started out as metal, tubelike structures that cardiologists used to open up narrowed or blocked blood vessels. The original stents, made of stainless steel, fixed the problem of blood vessels recoiling.

But over time, cardiologists found that stents become stenotic, meaning they themselves would become narrow, making it difficult for blood to flow through them. This problem was solved with the introduction of drug-eluting stents, which have a polymer that coats the metal struts of a stent and prevents stenosis from occurring.

Drug-eluting stents were a game-changer and reduced the need for repeated procedures by about 50% to 70%. Like millions of Americans, Cheney received several stents during his long battle with heart disease.

While stents are helpful, sometimes patients require a surgery called coronary artery bypass graft. Heart surgeons perform this procedure when there are blockages that angioplasty or a stent cannot fix, or when there are too many blockages in the heart arteries.

In 1988, at age 47, Cheney underwent a quadruple bypass operation to help restore blood flow to his heart following his third heart attack.

Battling heart disease

Despite the best efforts of cardiologists, many patients with heart disease, like Cheney, go on to develop heart failure.

There are two main types of heart failure. One – called heart failure with preserved ejection fraction – occurs when the left ventricle, the largest and strongest chamber of the heart, becomes stiff and unable to relax.

The other type – heart failure with reduced ejection fraction – occurs when the left ventricle becomes enlarged and weakened, and fails to pump blood efficiently.

Both types of heart failure make it difficult for the heart to adequately pump blood throughout the body. Cheney, like millions of people throughout the world, suffered from a dilated and weakened heart.

Fortunately, now there are several classes of medications used to treat the kind of heart failure that Cheney suffered from.

There are four main types of drugs that heart failure cardiologists use to manage patients with this condition, which are referred to as the “four pillars” of heart failure management. These medications work together to reduce the amount of stress placed on the heart and to create an environment that helps a weakened heart pump blood more efficiently throughout the body.

Thanks to these four medication types, millions of patients with dilated, weak hearts are living much longer with a higher quality of life and staying out of the hospital. Some of these medications are also used for patients with stiffened hearts, but there is a lot of ongoing research to better understand how to take care of patients with that kind of heart failure.

Despite the use of medications to treat dilated, weak hearts, some patients suffer from continued weakening of the heart muscle and progress to end-stage, or advanced, heart failure. When this happens, there are only two treatment options available. These options are a mechanical pump or a heart transplant.

Heart transplantation is the gold-standard, preferred treatment option for advanced heart failure that results from a dilated, weakened heart.

In 2023, there were about 4,500 heart transplants in the U.S. and about 2,200 in Europe. On average, patients live well over a decade with a heart transplant, and many will go on to live for 20 to 30 more years.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

Benjamin Franklin famously quipped, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

In an interview with “60 Minutes” in 2013, Cheney said his heart disease was the result of genetics and an unhealthy lifestyle. He admitted that he drank beer, ate fatty foods and also smoked three packs of cigarettes per day.

Millions of people across the U.S. and Europe have a lifestyle that is similar to that of Cheney’s prior to his heart transplant. While heart patients benefit from medications, stents and surgeries, preventive strategies cannot be underestimated.

Almost all major health organizations, including the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society and the Department of Health and Human Services, recommend 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity exercise.

This recommendation translates to a brisk walk about 30 minutes per day, five days per week. This level of exercise leads to large increases in survival and preservation of overall health throughout a lifetime.

While Cheney lived through five heart attacks, the goal for patients and their doctors is to avoid the first. Scientific advances in cardiology have led to a dramatic improvement in survival and quality of life for millions of people, but preventive measures are still by far the most effective lifesaving measure.

William Cornwell 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.

– ref. Vice President Dick Cheney’s life followed the arc of the biggest breakthroughs in cardiovascular medicine – https://theconversation.com/vice-president-dick-cheneys-life-followed-the-arc-of-the-biggest-breakthroughs-in-cardiovascular-medicine-269081

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Stephen Neely, Associate Professor of Public Affairs, University of South Florida

Over 40 million American adults – approximately 19% – live with an anxiety disorder, according to the National Institutes of Health.

Studies show this anxiety is most prevalent in young people. In recent years, social psychologists such as Jonathan Haidt have started to draw connections between tech use and anxiety. They argue that the ubiquity of smartphones and social media may affect not only the habits and emotions of young people but also key aspects of their brain development during adolescence.

Maintaining a constant online presence can result in excessive social comparison, disrupted sleep, fragmented attention and increased exposure to cyberbullying – all of which can increase the prevalence of anxiety.

We’re public health and policy researchers with an interest in mental health. We understand that this problem goes well beyond youthful angst. Evidence increasingly links this type of prolonged anxiety to a number of detrimental health issues, including weakened immune function, increased cardiovascular risk and impaired cognitive performance. Over time, these effects can increase the risk of chronic illness and other negative health outcomes.

So, in May 2025 we conducted our own survey to measure the prevalence of anxiety in the state where we live, Florida, and explore whether it is, in fact, related to age and social media use.

What our survey asked

We surveyed 500 adults, and we designed our research to ensure that our survey group matched the state’s population in terms of age, race, gender, political affiliation and geographic distribution.

We used a questionnaire called the GAD-7, which was developed by mental health professionals to assess symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder. The GAD-7 asks participants to identify how bothered they were about seven items during the past two weeks. They answered on a four-point scale, from “not at all” to “nearly everyday.” These seven items included questions on worrying, irritability, restlessness and feeling afraid or on edge.

A score under 10 indicates minimal (0-4) or mild (5-9) anxiety. Those who score between 10 and 14 exhibit moderate anxiety, while a score of 15 or higher is indicative of a severe anxiety disorder.

The difference between moderate and severe generalized anxiety corresponds to how often the participant experiences any of the seven items. For example, someone with severe generalized anxiety might experience all seven items nearly every day, while someone with moderate generalized anxiety might have experienced some of the items several days in the past two weeks.

We also asked participants about how much time they spend on social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, and how they feel while using these platforms.

What we found

Our survey found that roughly 1 in 5 Floridians are struggling with moderate to severe anxiety, which is consistent with national statistics.

While the average GAD-7 score was 4.74 – this would indicate that the “average” Floridian doesn’t have an anxiety disorder – 18.6% of participants reported symptoms of at least moderate anxiety, with nearly half of them rising to the level of severe.

This result tells us that nearly 3.5 million Floridians may suffer from clinically significant anxiety.

Members of Generation Z, ages 18 to 27 in our sample, reported the highest rates of anxiety by a significant margin. In fact, the average GAD-7 score for this group was 8.17 – just below the threshold for moderate anxiety – compared with an average of 6.50 for millennials, 5.32 for Gen Xers and 3.04 for baby boomers.

These averages track with previous nationwide studies, which have found that the portion of the U.S. adult population that suffers the most anxiety are members of Gen Z. According to a study conducted in 2020, 30.9% of adults ages 18 to 23 reported generalized anxiety disorder symptoms, compared to only 27.9% of millennials, 17.2% of Gen Xers and 8.1% of baby boomers.

Social media and anxiety in Gen Z

In order to understand whether social media use might help explain the higher rates of anxiety we observed among younger Floridians, we examined the relationship between time spent on social media and anxiety.

In general, those who didn’t use social media at all reported lower levels of anxiety, with an average GAD-7 score of 3.56. In comparison, the average GAD-7 score for those who use social media less than one hour per week was 3.74, and it rose consistently as social media use increased, climbing to an average of 6.10 among those who spent seven to nine hours a week on social media, and 7.08 for those who were logged on for 10 hours or more.

While time spent was important, the reasons why Floridians use social media also made a big difference in whether they experienced anxiety. Anxiety was lowest among those who use social media primarily to stay connected with family and friends. But it rose significantly among those who use social media to stay up to date with current trends and pop culture or to learn about health, fitness and beauty trends.

We also asked respondents whether they “sometimes feel like they’re missing out when they see what others post on social media.” Among those who agreed that they sometimes get social media FOMO, average anxiety scores ranged between 7.26 and 9.00. But among those who disagreed, average scores were significantly lower – 4.16 or less.

Time spent on social media matters for young people

In this data, we see a clear correlation between social media use and heightened anxiety, and we also see a greater tendency for Gen Zers and millennials to report higher levels of anxiety. This makes sense, given that younger people generally spend more time on social media.

But one important question remained to be answered: Can reducing social media use lead to lower rates of anxiety for the youngest adults?

In order to answer this question, we reexamined the relationship between average weekly social media use and anxiety. But this time, we restricted the analysis to only those respondents who were members of the Gen Z and millennial groups.

Even when the study was restricted to just these two groups, we found a clear and decisive link between social media use and anxiety. Those who reported spending less than one hour on social media each week had average GAD-7 scores of 2.89. Those scores rose consistently as time on social media increased, reaching a high of 8.73 among those who use social media 10 hours or more per week.

Moderating intake to bring down anxiety

The results of our survey appear to confirm the suspicions of social psychologists and techno-critics – namely, that the high rates of anxiety observed among younger Americans appear to be connected to their time online. This is particularly true for those spending time in digital spaces that facilitate social comparison and information overload.

We cannot be sure from just this survey that social media alone is to blame for increased generalized anxiety. Other factors may be involved, such as digital information overload and a decline in person-to-person contact. But the amount of time spent on social media does appear to be affecting the mental health of young people in Florida.

One potential solution may be to moderate intake. Some emerging research has suggested setting up automated daily reminders to limit social media use to 30 minutes a day. Another suggestion includes occasionally taking a monthlong break from social media.

Those who feel they need more support taking time off social media may benefit from seeking professional help, such as talking with a licensed therapist.

Read more stories from The Conversation about Florida.

Stephen Neely receives funding from the Florida Center for Cybersecurity for this study

Kaila Witkowski receives funding from the Florida Center for Cybersecurity for this study.

– ref. Florida residents’ anxiety is linked to social media use and varies with age, new study shows – https://theconversation.com/florida-residents-anxiety-is-linked-to-social-media-use-and-varies-with-age-new-study-shows-263010

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Michal Raucher, Assistant Professor of Jewish Studies, Rutgers University

When people picture a rabbi, they may imagine a man standing in front of a congregation in a synagogue. But “rabbi” means much more than that. For example, a rabbi could be a teacher, a nonprofit executive for a Jewish organization or a scholar of Jewish law – and, increasingly, some of those roles are held by Orthodox women.

For decades, liberal denominations have permitted women to be ordained. Orthodox Judaism, however, has largely prohibited it. Yet attitudes toward women’s study of rabbinic texts is changing, leading some Orthodox leaders to conclude that women are qualified for rabbinic jobs.

Israel’s chief rabbis – known as the Rabbinate, and historically seen as the top authority for the country’s Orthodox institutions – do not recognize women as rabbis or permit their ordination. But a significant change came in July 2025, when Israel’s High Court of Justice determined that women must be allowed to take the Rabbinate’s exams about Jewish law. The chief rabbis appealed the decision, but the court rejected their request for a retrial in November.

These tests are required to apply for public sector jobs as any kind of Jewish religious authority in Israel: ensuring that restaurants adhere to Jewish dietary laws, for example. Passing does not make someone an ordained rabbi; ordination is conferred through private rabbis and schools, and most Orthodox communities do not recognize female rabbis. But it does allow women to apply for jobs previously available only to men and receive higher salaries for the educational jobs they have already. Most importantly, the High Court’s decision recognizes that women have achieved high levels of education in rabbinic law.

I am a scholar of Jewish women and gender who researches religious authority among Orthodox women. While there have always been highly educated women, the court’s ruling reflects a growing trend among Orthodox women, while also opening up professional opportunities.

From Torah to Talmud

Formed in the 19th century, Orthodox Judaism is oriented around a strict observance of Jewish law and commitment to traditional gender roles. The denomination contains many divisions, each one adjusting their observance of Jewish law differently in response to modernity. While boys and men have been traditionally educated in Torah and rabbinic texts, historically girls and women did not have access to any formal Jewish education.

In the early 20th century, Jewish Polish teacher Sarah Schenirer revolutionized Orthodox girls’ education by founding the Bais Yaakov school system, now found in many countries. The Bais Yaakov education focused on teaching women Torah, while maintaining women’s place within the Jewish home.

But soon another debate arose: whether women could study Talmud. This text, composed between the second and seventh centuries C.E., contains the building blocks of rabbinic law. Studying the Talmud means learning the language, references and argument style of the Jewish legal system, called “halakha.”

Supporters and opponents of Talmud study for women both argued that it would forever alter orthodoxy. Opponents feared that if women understood Talmudic discussions, they would be interested in participating more in public religious life, upsetting the gender norms at the heart of orthodoxy.

Yet, in the 1970s, some well-known rabbis in Israel and America invited women into Talmud study. Since then, the number of Orthodox institutions that offer advanced Talmud study for women has grown significantly. Fifty years ago, there were only two options: Stern College of Yeshiva University in New York, or Michlelet Bruriah in Israel, now called Midreshet Lindenbaum. Today, dozens of institutions offer programs for Orthodox women who want to study rabbinic law.

The institutions where women can learn Talmud and rabbinic law span the Orthodox landscape. Many are affiliated with open or modern orthodoxy, which have embraced changes related to gender roles. Some cater to the Haredi or “ultra-Orthodox” population, and others to communities in between.

Most students who complete these programs are not seeking traditional ordination as rabbis. But the women graduate prepared for several other types of religious leadership, such as Jewish education, or as halakha guides for other women. Some programs prepare students to answer Jewish legal questions in particular areas, such as practices during menstruation or childbirth.

Feminist network

This growth in opportunities for Orthodox women is the result of a network of Orthodox feminists working across borders since the 1970s.

Michlelet Bruriah, for example, was founded by two American Jews who immigrated to Israel in the 1960s. Several other educational institutions developed through this network, including Matan, Nishmat and Drisha – all currently located in Israel.

Yeshivat Maharat, the first Orthodox seminary to ordain women as rabbis, is in New York. Several of its teachers and students came from these Israeli institutions, and some of their donors have also supported the schools in Israel.

The lawsuit challenging the Israeli chief rabbis’ restriction on women taking the Jewish law exam was filed by several people involved in this network.

Rabbi Seth Farber, for example, is an American immigrant to Israel and the founder of ITIM, a nonprofit that advocates for Jewish religious pluralism within Israeli society. He filed the lawsuit along with his wife, Michelle Cohen Farber, another American immigrant to Israel. She uses the title “rabbanit,” which traditionally refers to someone married to a rabbi. In her case, it also refers to her own expertise in Jewish legal texts: She co-founded Hadran, an organization that promotes Talmud study among women.

Other petitioners include Rabbanit Avital Engelberg, an Israeli-born graduate of Yeshivat Maharat who directs the seminary’s Israeli branch.

Impact

Women’s training allows them to enter a variety of fields. Opportunities for Orthodox women’s religious leadership is growing, and it’s not all about ordination. “Yoatzot halacha,” for example, counsel other women about issues related to marriage, sex and reproduction.

More broadly, these programs – and the Israeli court’s decision – validate women’s religious leadership. For decades, many Orthodox Jews have looked to Israel’s Orthodox rabbinate as the arbiter of religious authenticity. The ruling forces Orthodox Judaism worldwide to recognize that women can achieve high levels of Talmudic education.

Finally, the proliferation of educational programs reflects – and creates – a need within orthodoxy. It is not just a small cadre of women seeking these opportunities. Programs continue to open because there is a demand among Orthodox women for the chance to study rabbinic texts. As more institutions create programs for women, they are creating a new reality: one where Orthodox women are religious leaders.

Michal Raucher received funding from the Israel Institute, the University of Cincinnati, and the Hadassah Brandeis Institute to conduct research related to this article.

– ref. Orthodox Judaism is making space for women’s religious leadership – even without traditional ordination – https://theconversation.com/orthodox-judaism-is-making-space-for-womens-religious-leadership-even-without-traditional-ordination-261933