Category: The Conversation – USA

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Kristen Marie Beavers, Research Professor of Health and Exercise Science, Wake Forest University

Health and fitness trends come and go, and many fads don’t deliver on their promises – remember vibrating belts or sauna suits? Today, weighted vests, made from sturdy fabrics like nylon and filled with iron sand or small weights, are gaining widespread use. Here’s what to know about them:

Weighted vests have been around for centuries, but they have recently surged in popularity in response to a broader shift in thinking about exercise. No longer confined to the gym, physical activity is increasingly about maximizing health benefits of the movements people already do — things like walking, climbing stairs or cleaning their homes.

Weighted vests fit squarely into this philosophy. They offer a simple, manageable way to add resistance to everyday activities. And they don’t require additional time, complex equipment or major changes to established routines.

I study health and exercise science and have analyzed the effects of exercising with weighted vests. In my view, they represent a low-tech, high-impact opportunity to sneak resistance training into everyday activities. Research has shown that adding weight can help with building muscle and bone, as well as losing weight and keeping it off.

As with any tool, however, the results depends on how you use it.

The physiology behind the practice

The human body has great capacity to adapt to environmental stress. Weighted vests add mechanical stress, or load, to the body, requiring muscles and bones to withstand more force than usual.

Many parts of the body respond to this challenge. The brain learns to “recruit,” or activate, muscle fibers more effectively. This can help prevent injury and increase strength and performance.

Reacting to greater stress can improve muscle power and agility, which are vital for preventing injuries. Carrying a heavier load also makes your heart work harder, which improves cardiac health.

Finally, people need strong balance and proprioception, or body awareness, to protect joints and avoid falls and fractures, especially as they age. Evidence suggests that weighted vests can improve these capabilities.

Several lines of research – especially in aging, obesity and mobility science – have found that weighted vests provide meaningful benefits. They include:

• Improved muscle function: In one study from 2002, older people who wore a vest during a 12-week stair-climbing exercise program showed greater muscle power and performance in their legs.

• Potential for bone health benefits: A 1993 study showed that bone density modestly increased in older women wearing a weighted vest during a weekly low-level exercise class. A 2003 study in which subjects wore weighted vests during 32 weeks of walking and strength training found significant improvement in hip bone density.

• Metabolic improvements: In a 2025 study, my research group found that older adults who wore weighted vests for 10 hours per day while dieting ended up regaining less weight in the following year than older adults who dieted without wearing a weighted vest. These findings seem to be driven by metabolic improvements associated with weighted vest use.

Mixed benefits for bone health

Weighted vests are not a panacea, and there are limits to what wearing one can accomplish. My research, including a recently completed randomized clinical trial called INVEST in Bone Health, has sought to answer whether weighted vests can protect bone health during weight loss in older adults.

As we lose weight, we also tend to lose bone – a particular concern for older adults whose bones are already more fragile. Bone loss can increase the risk of fractures, threatening independence, mobility and overall quality of life.

In the INVEST in Bone Health study, we enrolled 150 older adults with obesity whose average age was 66. Of the group, 75% were women. We assigned them to three groups for a 12-month weight loss program that included meal replacement products and behavioral counseling.

The first group focused on weight loss alone. The second group engaged in the same weight loss program and also wore adjustable weighted vests for eight hours a day, with weight added to match the weight they lost, so that their bodies carried a constant load. The third group took part in weight loss activities and in supervised exercise using weight training machines.

After 12 months, we found that all participants had lost about 10% of their body weight, which was a positive outcome. However, they also had experienced significant declines in hip bone density, ranging between 1.2% and 1.9%. Wearing a weighted vest did not prevent bone loss at the hip compared with weight loss alone. Neither did resistance training.

Both the weighted-vest and resistance-training groups did show increased markers of bone formation compared with weight loss alone. In other words, weighted vest use and resistance exercise showed some evidence of bone growth, which may translate into skeletal benefits over time.

In addition, we recently presented findings at a national aging conference suggesting that weighted vests are more likely to benefit bone health in women than in men, which may be due to sex differences in bone sensitivity. We also found evidence that standing more while wearing the vests positively influences bone health. These findings reflect a growing understanding that weighted vests work more effectively in some people and situations than others.

Getting started

In adopting any new weight-bearing activity, it’s important to “start low and go slow” to avoid injury. Consult with your doctor, especially if you are new to exercise.

For continuous gains, you will need to progressively increase the amount of exercise that you do. In our clinical trials, we add a weight equal to one-eighth of an ounce for every eighth of an ounce a participant loses, to keep the muscles and bones under a consistent load.

Weighted vests are not one-size-fits-all, despite what the tag may say. Vests should not interfere with posture, breathing or your stride. Red flags include hunching, a clipped walking stride and, most importantly, low back pain or hyperextension.

Above all, listen to your body. If you start experiencing pain while wearing a weighted vest, take it off and consider seeing a clinician or physical therapist for guidance.

Kristen Marie Beavers receives funding from the NIH and serves in an advisory capacity for Novo Nordisk, Haleon, and Radius Health.

– ref. Wearing a weighted vest can promote bone health and weight loss, but it’s not a cure-all – https://theconversation.com/wearing-a-weighted-vest-can-promote-bone-health-and-weight-loss-but-its-not-a-cure-all-270646

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Patrick Jackson, Assistant Professor of Infectious Diseases, University of Virginia

A new year might mean new viral threats.

Old viruses are constantly evolving. A warming and increasingly populated planet puts humans in contact with more and different viruses. And increased mobility means that viruses can rapidly travel across the globe along with their human hosts.

As an infectious diseases physician and researcher, I’ll be keeping an eye on a few viruses in 2026 that could be poised to cause infections in unexpected places or in unexpected numbers.

Influenza A – on the cusp of a pandemic

Influenza A is a perennial threat. The virus infects a wide range of animals and has the ability to mutate rapidly. The most recent influenza pandemic – caused by the H1N1 subtype of influenza in 2009 – killed over 280,000 people worldwide in its first year, and the virus continues to circulate today. This virus was often called swine flu because it originated in pigs in Mexico before circulating around the world.

Most recently, scientists have been monitoring the highly-pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 subtype, or bird flu. This virus was first found in humans in southern China in 1997; wild birds helped spread the virus around the world. In 2024, the virus was found for the first time in dairy cattle in the U.S. and subsequently became established in herds in several states.

The crossover of the virus from birds to mammals created major concern that it could become adapted to humans. Studies suggest there have already been many cow-to-human transmissions.

In 2026, scientists will continue to look for any evidence that H5N1 has changed enough to be transmitted from human to human – a necessary step for the start of a new influenza pandemic. The influenza vaccines currently on the market probably don’t offer protection from H5N1, but scientists are working to create vaccines that would be effective against the virus.

Mpox – worldwide and liable to worsen

Mpox virus, formerly called monkeypox virus, was first discovered in the 1950s. For many decades, it was seen rarely, primarily in sub-Saharan Africa. Contrary to its original name, the virus mostly infects rodents and occasionally crossed over into humans.

Mpox is closely related to smallpox, and infection results in a fever and painful rash that can last for weeks. There are several varieties of mpox, including a generally more severe clade I and a milder clade II. A vaccine for mpox is available, but there are no effective treatments.

In 2022, a global outbreak of clade II mpox spread to more than 100 countries that had never seen the virus before. This outbreak was driven by human-to-human transmission of the virus through close contact, often via sex.

While the number of mpox cases has significantly declined since the 2022 outbreak, clade II mpox has become established around the world. Several countries in central Africa have also reported an increase in clade I mpox cases since 2024. Since August 2025, four clade I mpox cases have occurred in the U.S., including in people who did not travel to Africa.

It is unclear how mpox outbreaks in the U.S. and abroad will continue to evolve in 2026.

Oropouche virus – insect-borne and poised to spread

Oropouche virus was first identified in the 1950s on the island of Trinidad off the coast of South America. The virus is carried by mosquitoes and small biting midges, also known as no-see-ums.

Most people with the virus experience fever, headache and muscle aches. The illness usually lasts just a few days, but some patients have weakness that can persist for weeks. The illness can also recur after someone has initially recovered.

There are many unanswered questions about the Oropouche virus and the disease it causes, and there are no specific treatments or vaccines. For decades, infections in people were thought to occur only in the Amazon region. However, beginning in the early 2000s, cases began to show up in a larger area of South America, Central America and the Caribbean. Cases in the United States are usually among travelers returning from abroad.

In 2026, Oropouche outbreaks will likely continue to affect travelers in the Americas. The biting midge that carries Oropouche virus is found throughout North and South America, including the southeastern United States. The range of the virus could continue to expand.

Even more viral threats

A number of other viruses pose a risk in 2026.

Continuing global outbreaks of chikungunya virus may affect travelers, some of whom may want to consider getting vaccinated for this disease.

Measles cases continue to rise in the U.S. and globally against the backdrop of decreasing vaccination rates.

HIV is poised for a resurgence, despite the availability of effective treatments, due to disruptions in international aid.

And as-yet-undiscovered viruses can always emerge in the future as humans disrupt ecosystems and travel around the world.

Around the world, people, animals and the wider environment are dependent on each other. Vigilance for known and emerging viral threats and the development of new vaccines and treatments can help keep everyone safe.

Patrick Jackson has received funding from the National Institutes of Health, Pfizer, Clarametyx, First Light Diagnostics, and Moleculin Biotech. He is affiliated with Indivisible Charlottesville.

– ref. Viral outbreaks are always on the horizon – here are the viruses an infectious disease expert is watching in 2026 – https://theconversation.com/viral-outbreaks-are-always-on-the-horizon-here-are-the-viruses-an-infectious-disease-expert-is-watching-in-2026-271279

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Kymberlee Montgomery, Senior Associate Dean of Nursing, Drexel University

There is growing need for nurses in the United States – but not enough nurses currently working, or students training to become nurses, to promptly see all of the patients who need medical care.

Tens of thousands of nurses have left practice since the pandemic, and many more plan to leave within a few years, according to the 2024 National Nursing Workforce Survey, which reviews the number of registered nurses working in the U.S.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that there will be an average of 189,100 openings for registered nurses each year through 2032. In addition, there will be a need for approximately 128,400 new nurse practitioners by 2034 – making it the fastest-growing occupation in the country.

The tax and spending package signed into law in July 2025 will take effect on July 1, 2026. Among other things, it will likely make it even harder for people to take out loans and help pay for a graduate nursing degree.

We are nurses and professors who oversee large nursing programs at universities. We believe that new restrictions on how nursing students can take out federal loans to pay for their education are likely to prevent people from pursuing advanced nursing roles.

These new regulations will cause the shortage of practicing nurses to intensify – in turn, worsening the quality of care patients receive.

Clinics may offer fewer appointments, hospitals may be forced to reduce services, and nursing programs may have to accept fewer students. As a result, some patients will wait longer, travel farther, or not see nurses altogether.

Paying for nursing education

Someone can become a registered nurse with an associate or bachelor’s degree. But a graduate-level degree is needed for other nursing roles – including nurse practitioners, nurse anesthetists and nurse midwives.

Nursing school costs vary greatly, depending on which degree students are seeking and whether they attend a public or private school. Roughly three-quarters of graduate nursing students rely on student loans and graduate with debt to pay for programs that can range from US$30,000 to $120,000 or more.

We have found that nursing students, unlike medical students, often work while enrolled in their programs, stretching their education over longer periods and accumulating additional costs.

The tax and spending law eliminates several federal grants and loan repayment programs for nurses and aspiring nurse educators – faculty members who teach nursing students in colleges and universities.

The law also sharply restricts how much money graduate nursing students can borrow through federal student loans.

Approximately 59% of 1,550 nurses surveyed in December 2025 said that they are now less likely to pursue a graduate degree with the new borrowing limit changes.

A fractured system

Nurse practitioners provide the majority of primary care in the U.S. – particularly in rural areas and communities with few physicians.

In addition, certified registered nurse anesthetists administer anesthesia for surgeries and procedures in many areas. Meanwhile, certified nurse-midwives deliver babies and provide prenatal and postpartum care, especially in areas where there are few obstetricians.

Long waits for new patient appointments are now common across the country, with national surveys showing that patients often wait weeks to months before they receive medical care.

About a decade ago, new patients could often book appointments within days to a few weeks; but today, there are fewer available medical appointments and medical professionals to treat them. This is particularly true for many medical practices serving women, older adults and rural communities.

One of us – Dr. Montgomery – is a women’s health nurse practitioner who routinely sees patients wait months for new appointments in the mid-Atlantic. These delays translate into postponed cancer screenings, delayed medication management and untreated chronic conditions.

Research consistently shows that nursing shortages are associated with worse patient outcomes, including higher mortality and delayed treatment.

Nursing left off the professional degree list

Under the new law, the Department of Education created a classification system that distinguishes professional from nonprofessional graduate degrees. Nursing is now considered a nonprofessional degree.

As a result, graduate nursing students will soon face lower borrowing limits than they currently do.

Previously, there was no need to label nursing as professional or not, because federal student loan borrowing was not capped in a way that required this distinction.

Now, students in professional graduate programs, such as medicine and law, may borrow up to $50,000 per year in federal loans and $200,000 in total.

Graduate nursing students, by contrast, will soon face a federal student loan cap of $20,500 per year and $100,000 total over the course of their education – a significant reduction from prior borrowing options.

The new law also eliminates the Direct PLUS Loan program. This separate, federal student loan program allows students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance of graduate nursing school after they reached annual loan limits on traditional federal loans.

More than 140 members of Congress from both political parties urged the Department of Education in December 2025 to reverse course and classify nursing as a professional degree.

The faculty bottleneck

Graduate loan limits will worsen another critical problem – the shortage of nursing faculty.

There are currently 1,693 full-time vacancies for nursing faculty positions, according to a survey in 2024 by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing. Of those open positions, 84% require or prefer a doctoral degree.

Universities cannot admit nursing students if there are not enough faculty to teach them.

Nursing programs in the U.S. turned away more than 80,000 qualified applicants to baccalaureate and graduate nursing programs in 2023, in part because they did not have enough faculty.

Better solutions exist

There are policy changes that could prevent this domino effect.

Policymakers could classify nursing as a professional degree for loan purposes, aligning borrowing limits with the documented costs of accredited programs.

Congress and individual states could expand scholarships and loan-repayment programs for nurses who teach or serve in rural and underserved communities.

Universities and governments could work together to share nurse training costs.

Graduate nursing education is not a luxury. It is a cornerstone of the country’s health care system.

Helping nurses afford an education is not just about nurses – it is about patients, communities and the future of medical care in the U.S.

Mary Ellen Smith Glasgow is an AACN Board Member. The views, analyses, and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or positions of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing.

Kymberlee Montgomery 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. New federal loan limits will worsen America’s nursing shortage and leave patients waiting longer for care – https://theconversation.com/new-federal-loan-limits-will-worsen-americas-nursing-shortage-and-leave-patients-waiting-longer-for-care-271807

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Małgorzata (Gosia) K. Citko-DuPlantis, Assistant Professor in Japanese Literature and Culture, University of Tennessee

One of Japan’s most recognizable cultural practices – the Japanese tea ceremony, known as chanoyu, or chadō – is being reshaped by tourism, wellness culture and social media.

Matcha, the Japanese powdered green tea that is used during the ceremony, has entered the global marketplace. Influencers post highly curated tearoom photos, wellness brands market matcha as a “superfood,” and cafés worldwide present whisked green tea as a symbol of mindful living.

The Japanese tea ceremony is deeply rooted in the ideals of Zen Buddhism, but the current matcha hype has little to do with the tea ceremony. Green tea has become part of the on-the-go coffee culture. On social media, a centuries-old spiritual practice is compressed into a 15-second reel.

As a scholar of premodern Japanese literature and culture, I know that this commercialization is not without tension. The reflective values of the Japanese tea ceremony trace their origins to a monastic routine.

History of the Japanese tea

Tea arrived in Japan from China in the eighth century. Emperor Shōmu served powdered tea, an ancestor to what we today know as matcha, to Buddhist monks in 729 C.E.

Around the end of the 12th century, the practice of serving tea became more widespread after the Zen monk Eisai returned from China with matcha tea seeds from the plant that was to become the source of much of the tea grown in Japan today. He also brought with him the knowledge of how tea rituals were practiced in Chinese Buddhist temples.

Wild tea grew in Japan, but the tea grown from Eisai’s seeds became known as “honcha” or true tea. Matcha soon spread through Zen monasteries, where it was believed to generate greater enlightenment than long hours of meditation.

As Zen Buddhism gained influence among the warrior class in the 13th century, monks carried tea culture beyond temple walls. In 1483, Ashikaga Yoshimasa – Japan’s military ruler, or shogun, who was also a patron of the arts, constructed one of the earliest tearooms. The tearoom was inside his villa in Kyoto, later known as the Temple of the Silver Pavilion or Ginkakuji. There, the tea ceremony was both a contemplative act and an occasion to display Chinese calligraphy, paintings and ceramics.

What matters is the moment

The most transformative figure in the history of the Japanese tea ceremony was a 16th-century tea master, Sen no Rikyū. Rejecting ostentation, he favored locally made utensils, rough ceramics, and small, rustic spaces designed to quiet the senses.

This aesthetic and moral principle – known as “wabi” – valued imperfection, humility and mindful presence. Grounded in simplicity, wabi guided everything from the size of the room to the angle of a flower stem.

Serving as tea master to military leaders, or shoguns, who supported his activities, Rikyū transformed the tea ceremony to reflect ideals of wabi.

A poem by Rikyū captures his philosophy:

cha no yu to wa
tada yu o wakashi
cha o tatete
nomu bakari naru
koto to shiru beshi

To understand the tea ceremony
Is simply this:
Heat the water,
Whisk the tea,

And drink.

The poem’s clarity echoes a foundational sensibility of the tea ceremony: what matters is the moment itself.

Rikyū’s grandson Sōtan and his three sons carried on the traditions of tea ceremony. Their three schools – Ura Senke, Omote Senke and Mushanokōji Senke – differ in tea whisking styles, utensils they use and levels of formality, yet continue to preserve Rikyū’s principles to date. All three schools have headquarters in Kyoto.

The ritual of impermanence

The manner of preparing powdered green tea depends on the techniques and practices of the various schools. The following description is based on the Ura Senke way of preparation.

A full tea gathering, or “chaji,” may last several hours. Every choice – from utensils to food to flowers – reflects the season, time of day and purpose of the occasion, whether welcoming guests, marking a farewell or observing a celebration.

The ceremony takes place in a tearoom or “chashitsu,” decorated only with a hanging scroll and a single flower – both selected to set the gathering’s spiritual tone.

Guests assemble in a waiting room and taste the hot water used for tea. They then proceed along a water-sprinkled garden path meant to wash away the “dust” of the outside world.

After greeting the host, they cleanse their hands and mouths and enter the tearoom through a small door, the “nijiriguchi.” The passage from the ordinary way of the world to the contemplative way of tea symbolizes humility.

Inside, they admire the scroll, kettle and hearth before taking their seats.

In the guests’ presence, the host builds the charcoal fire and serves a carefully prepared seasonal meal: rice, soup, seafood or vegetables, pickles, sake and a principal sweet.

When the meal ends, the host briefly re-enters alone to replace the scroll with flowers, sweep the room and arrange the utensils for “koicha,” the thick tea that forms the heart of the gathering. At that time the guests have been asked to leave the room. They re-enter once the bell or gong is run. The host reenters the room as well with chawan – the whisk – and all the utensils; the tea is served.

A jar of fresh water representing yin is paired with the fire’s yang. Yin (feminine) and yang (masculine) are two opposing yet complementary forces in Chinese philosophy that represent the duality and balance found in the universe. The tea jar or “chaire,” wrapped in silk, is set out on a stand chosen for the occasion. A gong or bell summons the guests to return.

The host enters with the tea bowl or “chawan,” a white linen cloth, a whisk and a bamboo scoop. Each utensil is cleaned, and the bowl is warmed, dried and filled with three scoops of powdered tea before hot water is added and kneaded with the whisk into a smooth, thick mixture. The single bowl is shared among all guests, then returned to the host. The tea jar and scoop are cleaned and presented for close viewing.

The charcoal fire is built again for “usucha,” or thin tea, which gently prepares guests to return to everyday life. Thin tea is prepared in a way similar to that of thick tea, except that less tea powder, and of a lower quality, is used. Dry sweets accompany this lighter, frothier tea, served in individual bowls. When the final cup is finished, guests express their gratitude, depart along the garden path and leave the host watching quietly from the tearoom door.

Underlying the entire ritual is the principle of “ichigo ichie” – “one time, one meeting.” No gathering can ever be repeated. Every season, every person, every breath is singular.

The tea ceremony, often translated in English as “the Way of Tea,” trains participants to feel that fleetingness, to hold the moment warmly and attentively before it dissolves.

The rise of global matcha culture

Today, the tea ceremony lives a double life. While traditional schools continue to teach Rikyū’s disciplined aesthetics, matcha has entered its global afterlife of commercialization and popular culture.

The explosion of matcha consumption has led to a high demand. Prices for high-grade ceremonial matcha have risen dramatically, and producers struggle to meet demand. Japan now exports far more matcha than ever before.

Many people encounter matcha not through Zen teachings or formal tea ceremonies but through lifestyle trends and the contemporary fascination with “calming rituals.” On social media, matcha is promoted as a wellness routine and lifestyle aesthetic.

In this new landscape, the Japanese “Way of Tea” exists both as a revered cultural practice and as a global commodity – its spiritual heart intact but circulating in forms its earliest practitioners could scarcely have imagined.

Małgorzata (Gosia) K. Citko-DuPlantis 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 tourism, a booming wellness culture and social media are transforming the age-old Japanese tea ceremony – https://theconversation.com/how-tourism-a-booming-wellness-culture-and-social-media-are-transforming-the-age-old-japanese-tea-ceremony-262310

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Elizabeth A. Logan, Associate Director of the Huntington-USC Institute on California and The West, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

On Jan. 7, 2025, people across the Los Angeles area watched in horror as powerful winds began spreading wildfires through neighborhood after neighborhood. Over three weeks, the fires destroyed more than 16,000 homes and businesses. At least 31 people died, and studies suggest the smoke and stress likely contributed to hundreds more deaths.

For many of us who lived through the fires, it was a traumatic experience that also brought neighborhoods closer together. Neighbors scrambled to help each other as burning embers started spot fires that threatened homes. They helped elderly and disabled residents evacuate.

As the LA region rebuilds a year later, many people are calling for improvements to zoning regulations, building codes, insurance and emergency communications systems. Conversations are underway about whether rebuilding in some locations makes sense at all.

But managing fire risk is about more than construction practices, regulations and rules. It is also about people and neighborliness – the ethos and practice of caring for those in your community, including making choices and taking steps on your own property to help keep the people around you safe.

As LA-area residents and historians who witnessed the fires’ destruction and have been following the recovery closely, we believe building a safer future for fire-risk communities includes increasing neighborliness and building shared knowledge of the past. Much of that starts in the schools.

Neighborliness matters in community fire safety

Being neighborly means recognizing the connectedness of life and addressing the common good, beyond just the individual and family network.

It includes community-wide fire mitigation strategies that can help prevent fires from spreading.

During the Southern California fires, houses, fences, sheds, roofs and dry vegetation served as the fuel for wind-blown fires racing through neighborhoods miles away from forested land. Being neighborly means taking steps to reduce risks on your own property that could put your neighbors at risk. Following fire officials’ recommendations can mean clearing defensible space around homes, replacing fire-prone plants and limiting or removing burnable material, such as wood fencing and sheds.

Neighborliness also recognizes the varying mental health impacts of significant wildfire events on the people who experience them. Being neighborly means listening to survivors and reaching out, particularly to neighbors who may be struggling or need help with recovery, and building community bonds.

Neighbors are often the first people who can help in an emergency before local, state and federal responders arrive. A fast neighborhood response, whether helping put out spot fires on a lawn or ensuring elderly residents or those without vehicles are able to evacuate, can save lives and property in natural disasters.

Fire awareness, neighborliness start in school

Community-based K-12 schools are the perfect places for learning and practicing neighborliness and providing transformative fire education.

Learning about the local history of wildfires, from the ecological impact of beneficial fire to fire disasters and how communities responded, can transform how children and their families think about fires and fire readiness.

However, in our view, fire history and safety is not currently taught nearly enough, even in fire-prone California.

California’s Department of Education Framework and Content Standards for K-12 education offer several opportunities to engage students with innovative lessons about wildfire causes, preparedness and resilience. For example, fourth grade history and social science standards include understanding “how physical environments (e.g., water, landforms, vegetation, climate) affect human activity.” Middle school science standards include mapping the history of natural hazards, though they only mention forest fires when discussing technology.

Schools could, and we believe should, include more fire history, ecological knowledge and understanding of the interconnectedness of neighborhoods and neighbors when it comes to fire safety in those and other classes.

Elementary schools in many states bring in firefighters to talk about fire safety, often through programs run by groups like the California Fire Prevention Organization. These efforts could spend more time looking beyond house fires to discuss how and where wildfires start, how they spread and how to make your own home and neighborhood much safer.

Models such as the U.S. Fire Administration’s collaboration with Sesame Workshop on the Sesame Street Fire Safety Program for preschool kids offer examples, blending catchy phrases with safety and science lessons.

Including knowledge from Indigenous tribal elders, fire management professionals and other community members can provide more robust fire education and understanding of the roles people play in fire risk and risk reduction. Introducing students to future career pathways in fire safety and response can also help students see their roles in fire safety.

As LA recovers from the 2025 fires, fire-prone states can prepare for future fires by expanding education about fire and neighborliness, and helping students take that knowledge home to their families.

Remembering, because it will happen again

Neighborliness also demands a pivot from the reflexive amnesia regarding natural and unnatural disasters to knowing that it will happen here again.

There’s a dangerous, stubborn forgetfulness in the vaunted Land of Sunshine. It is all part of the myth that helped make Southern California such a juggernaut of growth from the late 19th century forward.

The region was, boosters and public officials insisted, special: a civilization growing in the benign embrace of the environment. Anything grew here, the endless Los Angeles Basin could absorb everyone, and if there wasn’t enough water to slake the thirst of metropolitan ambitions, engineers and taxpayers would see to it that water from far away – even very far away – would be brought here.

The Southland is beautiful, but a place can be both beautiful and precarious, particularly in the grip of climate change. These are lessons we believe should be taught in K-12 classrooms as an important step toward lowering disaster risk. Living with fire means remembering and understanding the past. That knowledge, and developing more neighborly behavior, can save your life and the lives of your neighbors.

Elizabeth A. Logan receives funding from the Sierra Nevada Conservancy and the WHH Foundation.

William Deverell receives funding from the Sierra Nevada Conservancy and the WHH Foundation.

– ref. LA fires showed how much neighborliness matters for wildfire safety – https://theconversation.com/la-fires-showed-how-much-neighborliness-matters-for-wildfire-safety-272505

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Jake Scott, Clinical Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University

The Trump administration’s overhauling of the decades-old childhood vaccination schedule, announced by federal health officials on Jan. 5, 2026, has raised alarm among public health experts and pediatricians.

The U.S. childhood immunization schedule, the grid of colored bars pediatricians share with parents, recommends a set of vaccines given from birth through adolescence to prevent a range of serious infections. The basic structure has been in place since 1995, when federal health officials and medical organizations first issued a unified national standard, though new vaccines have been added regularly as science advanced.

That schedule is now being dismantled.

In all, the sweeping change reduces the universally recommended childhood vaccines from 17 to 11. It moves vaccines against rotavirus, influenza, hepatitis A, hepatitis B and meningococcal disease from routine recommendations to “shared clinical decision-making,” a category that shifts responsibility for initiating vaccination from the health care system to individual families.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has cast doubt on vaccine safety for decades, justified these changes by citing a 33-page assessment comparing the U.S. schedule to Denmark’s.

But the two countries differ in important ways. Denmark has 6 million people, universal health care and a national registry that tracks every patient. In contrast, the U.S. has 330 million people, 27 million uninsured and a system where millions move between providers.

These changes follow the CDC’s decision in December 2025 to drop a long-held recommendation that all newborns be vaccinated against hepatitis B, despite no new evidence that questions the vaccine’s long-standing safety record.

I’m an infectious disease physician who treats vaccine-preventable diseases and reviews the clinical trial evidence behind immunization recommendations. The vaccine schedule wasn’t designed in a single stroke. It was built gradually over decades, shaped by disease outbreaks, technological breakthroughs and hard-won lessons about reducing childhood illness and death.

The early years

For the first half of the 20th century, most states required that students be vaccinated against smallpox to enter the public school system. But there was no unified national schedule. The combination vaccine against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis, known as the DTP vaccine, emerged in 1948, and the Salk polio vaccine arrived in 1955, but recommendations for when and how to give them varied by state, by physician and even by neighborhood.

The federal government stepped in after tragedy struck. In 1955, a manufacturing failure at Cutter Laboratories in Berkeley, California, produced batches of polio vaccine containing live virus, causing paralysis in dozens of children. The incident made clear that vaccination couldn’t remain a patchwork affair. It required federal oversight.

In 1964, the U.S. surgeon general established the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, to provide expert guidance and recommendations to the CDC on vaccine use. For the first time, a single body would evaluate the evidence and issue national recommendations.

New viral vaccines

Through the 1960s, vaccines against measles (1963), mumps (1967) and rubella (1969) were licensed and eventually combined into what’s known as the MMR shot in 1971. Each addition followed a similar pattern: a disease that killed or disabled thousands of children annually, a vaccine that proved safe and effective in trials, and a recommendation that transformed a seemingly inevitable childhood illness into something preventable.

The rubella vaccine went beyond protecting the children who received it. Rubella, also called German measles, is mild in children but devastating to fetuses, causing deafness, heart defects and intellectual disabilities when pregnant women are infected.

A rubella epidemic in 1964 and 1965 drove this point home: 12.5 million infections and 20,000 cases of congenital rubella syndrome left thousands of children deaf or blind. Vaccinating children also helped protect pregnant women by curbing the spread of infection. By 2015, rubella had been eliminated from the Americas.

Hepatitis B and the safety net

In 1991, the CDC added hepatitis B vaccination at birth to the schedule. Before then, around 18,000 children every year contracted the virus before their 10th birthday.

Many parents wonder why newborns need this vaccine. The answer lies in biology and the limitations of screening.

An adult who contracts hepatitis B has a 95% chance of clearing the virus. An infant infected in the first months of life has a 90% chance of developing chronic infection, and 1 in 4 will eventually die from liver failure or cancer. Infants can acquire the virus from their mothers during birth, from infected household members or through casual contact in child care settings. The virus survives on surfaces for days and is highly contagious.

Early strategies that targeted only high-risk groups failed because screening missed too many infected mothers. Even today, roughly 12% to 18% of pregnant women in the U.S. are never screened for hepatitis B. Until ACIP dropped the recommendation in early December 2025, a first dose of this vaccine at birth served as a safety net, protecting all infants regardless of whether their mothers’ infection status was accurately known.

This safety net worked: Hepatitis B infections in American children fell by 99%.

A unified standard

For decades, different medical organizations issued their own, sometimes conflicting, recommendations. In 1995, ACIP, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians jointly released the first unified childhood immunization schedule, the ancestor of today’s familiar grid. For the first time, parents and physicians had a single national standard.

The schedule continued to evolve. ACIP recommended vaccinations for chickenpox in 1996; rotavirus in 2006, replacing an earlier version withdrawn after safety monitoring detected a rare side effect; and HPV, also in 2006.

Each addition followed the same rigorous process: evidence review, risk-benefit analysis and a public vote by the advisory committee.

More vaccines, less burden

Vaccine skeptics, including Kennedy, often claim erroneously that children’s immune systems are overloaded because the number of vaccines they receive has increased. This argument is routinely marshaled to argue for a reduced childhood vaccination schedule.

One fact often surprises parents: Despite the increase in recommended vaccines, the number of immune-stimulating molecules in those vaccines, called antigens, has dropped dramatically since the 1980s, which means they are less demanding on a child’s immune system.

The whole-cell pertussis vaccine used in the 1980s alone contained roughly 3,000 antigens. Today’s entire schedule contains fewer than 160 antigens, thanks to advances in vaccine technology that allow precise targeting of only the components needed for protection.

What lies ahead

For decades, ACIP recommended changes to the childhood schedule only when new evidence or clear shifts in disease risk demanded it. The Jan. 5 announcement represents a fundamental break from that norm: Multiple vaccines moved out of routine recommendations simultaneously, justified not by new safety data but by comparison to a country with a fundamentally different health care system.

Kennedy accomplished this by filling positions involved in vaccine safety with political appointees. His hand-picked ACIP is stacked with members with a history of anti-vaccine views. The authors of the assessment justifying the change, senior officials at the Food and Drug Administration and at HHS, are both long-time critics of the existing vaccine schedule. The acting CDC director who signed the decision memo is an investor with no clinical or scientific background.

The practical effect will be felt in clinics across the country. Routine recommendations trigger automatic prompts in medical records and enable nurses to vaccinate under standing orders. “Shared clinical decision-making” requires a physician to be involved in every vaccination decision, creating bottlenecks that will inevitably reduce uptake, particularly for the more than 100 million Americans who lack regular access to primary care.

Major medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have said that they will continue recommending the full complement of childhood vaccines. Several states, including California, New York and Illinois, will follow established guidelines rather than the new federal recommendations, creating a patchwork where children’s protection depends on where they live.

Portions of this article originally appeared in a previous article published on Dec. 18, 2025.

Jake Scott 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. RFK Jr. guts the US childhood vaccine schedule despite its decades-long safety record – https://theconversation.com/rfk-jr-guts-the-us-childhood-vaccine-schedule-despite-its-decades-long-safety-record-272788

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alexander L. Metcalf, Associate Professor of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, University of Montana

Management of gray wolves (Canis lupus) has a reputation for being one of the most contentious conservation issues in the United States. The topic often conjures stark images of supporters versus opponents: celebratory wolf reintroductions to Yellowstone National Park and Colorado contrasted with ranchers outraged over lost cattle; pro-wolf protests juxtaposed with wolf bounty hunters. These vivid scenes paint a picture of seemingly irreconcilable division.

But in contrast to these common caricatures, surveys of public opinion consistently show that most people around the world hold positive views of wolves, often overwhelmingly so. This trend holds true even in politically conservative U.S. states, often assumed to be hostile toward wolf conservation. For example, a recent study of ours in Montana found that an increasing majority of residents, 74% in 2023, are tolerant or very tolerant of wolves.

Still, the perception of deep conflict persists and is often amplified by media coverage and politicians. But what if these exaggerated portrayals, and the assumptions of division they reinforce, are themselves contributing to the very conflict they describe? In a study published Jan. 6, 2026, we explored this question.

The human side of conservation

We are social scientists who study the human dimensions of environmental issues, from wildfire to wildlife. Using tools from psychology and other social sciences, we examine how people relate to nature and to each other when it comes to environmental issues. These human relationships often matter more to conservation outcomes than the biology of the species or ecosystems in question. Conservation challenges are typically people problems.

One of the most powerful yet underappreciated forces in these dynamics is social identity, the psychological force that compels people to sort themselves into groups and take those group boundaries seriously. Social identity theory, a foundational concept in psychology, shows that once people see themselves as members of a group, they are naturally inclined to favor “us” and be wary of “them.”

But strong group loyalties also come with costs: They can distort how people see and interpret the world and exacerbate conflict between groups.

When identity distorts reality

Social identity can shape how people interpret even objectively true facts. It can lead people to misjudge physical distances and sizes and assume the worst about members of different groups. When this identification runs deep, a phenomenon called identity fusion can occur, when someone’s personal identity becomes tightly linked to their group identity.

This phenomenon can lead people to act in questionable ways, even ways they might otherwise find immoral, particularly when they believe their group is under threat. For example, it’s possible these forces contribute to high-profile cover-ups of reprehensible behavior.

In our recent research, we tested how activating people’s political identities – simply reminding them of their own political party affiliations – affected their perceptions of wolves in the U.S.

Across two studies involving over 2,200 participants from nine states with wolf populations, we found a striking pattern. When we activated people’s political identity, their attitudes toward wolves became more polarized. Democrats’ affinity for wolves increased, as did Republicans’ aversion.

On the other hand, when our particants’ political identities were not activated, they generally liked wolves, regardless of their politics. In a follow-up experiment where we had people guess their fellow and rival party members’ attitudes toward wolves, we found this identity-based polarization was driven by people’s assumptions about their in-group but not their out-group. People incorrectly assumed others in their party held extreme views about wolves, and those assumptions in turn shaped their own attitudes toward the species.

In other words, the caricatures themselves created the conflict.

This is an ironic and tragic outcome: A situation where many people actually agree became polarized not because of deep-seated differences but because of how people imagined others feel.

Bridging the gap

Fortunately, the same psychological forces that divide people can also bring them together. When we showed our research participants the actual views of others, specifically that most of their fellow political party members held positive attitudes toward wolves, their own attitudes moderated.

Other strategies for uniting people involve activating “cross-cutting” identities, or shared identities that span traditional divides. For instance, someone might identify both as a rancher and a conservationist, or a hunter who is also a wildlife advocate. More broadly, our respondents are all Americans and community members who share a common humanity. Highlighting these blended and shared identities can reduce the sense of “us vs. them” and open the door to more productive conversations.

The debate over wolves may seem like an intractable clash of values. But our research suggests it doesn’t have to be. When people move beyond caricatures of conflict and recognize the common ground that already exists, we can begin to shift the conversation and maybe even find ways to live not just with wolves, but with each other.

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.

– ref. Americans generally like wolves − except when we’re reminded of our politics – https://theconversation.com/americans-generally-like-wolves-except-when-were-reminded-of-our-politics-267511

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Shelley Inglis, Senior Visiting Scholar with the Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights, Rutgers University

The U.S. military operation in Venezuela and capture of President Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3, 2026, topped off months of military buildup and targeted strikes in the Caribbean Sea. It fulfills President Donald Trump’s claim to assert authoritative control over the Western Hemisphere, articulated in his administration’s 2025 National Security Strategy.

Some national security experts say U.S. military action in Venezuela – taken without U.S. congressional approval or U.N. Security Council authorization – is unlawful. It may violate domestic and international law.

The Venezuela attack represents the clearest example during Trump’s second presidency of the shift from traditional American values of democratic freedom and the rules-based international order to an America exerting unilateral power based purely on perceived economic interests and military might. Autocratic leaders are unconstrained by law and balance of power, using force to impose their will on others.

So, what does this transition from a liberal America in the world to an autocratic U.S. look like? After decades of working internationally on democracy and peace-building, I see three interrelated areas of long-standing U.S. foreign policy engagement being unraveled.

1. Peace and conflict prevention

The Trump administration’s actions in Venezuela reflect its “peace through strength” approach to international relations, which emphasizes military power. The actions also follow the emphasis the administration places on economic pressure and wins as a deterrent to war and a cudgel for peace.

This approach contrasts with decades of diplomatic efforts to build peace processes that last.

Foreign policy experts point out that the Trump administration’s emphasis on business deal-making in its conduct of foreign relations, focused on bargaining between positions, misses the point of peacemaking, which is to address underlying interests shared by parties and build the trust required to tackle the drivers of conflict.

Trump’s focus on deal-making also counters the world’s traditional reliance on the U.S. as an honest broker and a reliable economic partner that supports free trade. Trump made it clear that U.S. interest in oil is a key rationale for the Venezuela attack.

Before Venezuela, the limits of the Trump administration’s approach were already showing in the global conflicts Trump claims to have halted. That’s evident in ongoing violence between Thailand and Cambodia and in ceasefire violations in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Moreover, U.S. expertise and resources for sustainable peacemaking and preventing conflict are gone.

The entire Bureau of Conflict Stabilization Operations in the U.S. Department of State was dismantled in May 2025, while funding for conflict prevention and key peace programs like Women, Peace and Security was cut.

Trump’s unilateral military action against Venezuela belie an authentic commitment to sustainable peace.

While it’s too soon to predict Venezuela’s future under U.S. control, the Trump administration’s approach is likely to drive more global conflict and violence in 2026, as major powers begin to understand the different rules and learn to play the new game.

2. Democracy and human rights

Since the 1980s, U.S. national security strategies have incorporated aspects of democracy promotion and human rights as U.S. values.

Trump has not highlighted human rights and democracy as rationales for capturing Maduro. And, so far, the administration has rejected claims to the Venezuelan leadership by opposition leader María Corina Machado and Edmundo González, widely considered the legitimate winner of the 2024 presidential election.

Much of the U.S. foreign policy to build democracy globally and promote human rights was delivered through foreign assistance, worth over US$3 billion in 2024. The Trump administration cut that by nearly 75% in 2025.

These funds sought to promote fair elections, supporting civil societies and free media globally. They were also meant to help enable independent and corruption-free judiciaries in many countries, including Venezuela.

Since 1998, for example, the U.S. has funded 85% of the annual $10 million budget of the U.N Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. The fund, now imperiled, helps survivors recover from torture in the U.S. and around the world.

The congressionally mandated annual Human Rights Report issued by the State Department in August signaled the Trump administration’s intent to undermine key human rights obligations of foreign governments.

However, the White House has used tariffs, sanctions and military strikes to punish countries on purported human rights-related grounds, such as in Brazil, Nigeria and South Africa. Equally concerning to democracy defenders is its rhetoric chastising European democracies and apparent willingness to elevate political parties in Europe that reject human rights.

3. International cooperation

A major aim of U.S. foreign policy has traditionally been to counter threats to America’s security that require cooperation with other governments.

But the Trump administration is ignoring or denying many transnational threats. They include terrorism, nuclear proliferation, pandemics, new technologies and climate change.

Moreover, the tools that America helped build to tackle shared global threats, like international law and multilateral organizations such as the United Nations, have been disparaged and undermined.

Even before the U.S. attack on Venezuela, scholars were warning of the collapse of the international norm, embedded in the U.N. Charter, that prohibits the use of force by one sovereign country against another, except in specific cases of self-defense.

Early in 2025, Trump signaled an end to much of U.S. multilateral engagement, pulling the country out of many international bodies, agendas and treaties.

The administration proposed eliminating its contributions to U.N. agencies like the fund for children. It is also allocating only $300 million this year to the U.N., which is about one-fifth of the membership dues it owes the organization by law. A looming budgetary crisis has now consumed this sole worldwide deliberation body.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration says migration and drug trafficking, including from Venezuela, pose the greatest security threats. Its solutions – continuing U.S. economic and military might in the Americas – ignore shared challenges like corruption and human trafficking that drive these threats and also undermine U.S. economic security.

There is also evidence that the Trump administration is not only disregarding international law and retreating from America’s long-standing respect for international cooperation, but it’s also seeking to reshape policy in its own image and punish those it disagrees with.

For example, its call to reframe global refugee protections – to undermine the principle that prohibits a return of people to a country where they could be persecuted – would alter decades-old international and U.S. domestic law. The Trump administration has already dismantled much of the U.S. refugee program, lowering the cap for 2025 to historic levels.

Even for those who work in international institutions, there could also be a price to pay for an illiberal America. For instance, the Trump administration has economically sanctioned many judges and prosecutors of the International Criminal Court for their work.

And the administration has threatened more sanctions unless the court promises not to prosecute Trump – a more salient challenge now with the apparent U.S. aggression against Venezuela, which is a party to the International Criminal Court.

Some democracy experts worry that the U.S. military action in Venezuela not only undermines international law, but it may also serve to reinforce Trump’s project to undo the rule of law and democracy at home.

Until July 1, 2025, Shelley Inglis served in the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance at the United States Agency for International Development (U.S.A.I.D).

– ref. 2026 begins with an increasingly autocratic United States rising on the global stage – https://theconversation.com/2026-begins-with-an-increasingly-autocratic-united-states-rising-on-the-global-stage-271670

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Lisa Bosman, Associate Professor of Technology Leadership and Innovation, Purdue University

Many engineering and science undergraduates are approaching January application deadlines for prestigious summer internships and study abroad programs – or, in some cases, a spot in the National Science Foundation’s highly competitive Research Experience for Undergraduates, a specialized, paid summer research internship.

Roughly 6,000 American undergraduates take part in this internship each year. Landing this competitive research internship is a big deal. It can give young people interested in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) careers hands-on experience, real confidence and a clear picture of what to expect when enrolling in science and engineering graduate programs.

And even if a student decides graduate school isn’t for them, an REU, as it is often known, still shows young people that there are many exciting paths to consider in STEM professions.

A shift for REU internships

These in-person, 10-week summer research experiences mostly take place at approximately 150 to 200 universities in the United States, but also at schools in the United Kingdom, Singapore, Germany and other countries.

REU internships don’t always produce immediate research breakthroughs, but their real purpose is to spark students’ interest in science and prepare them for graduate school and research careers.

During the pandemic, many universities shifted to running REU programs online. Students participating in online REUs conducted research from home and met mentors online, rather than in person.

Surprisingly, this change not only saved money, but it also improved student outcomes in terms of what they said they learned, entrepreneurial skills they developed and the confidence they gained in applying to engineering and technology graduate programs.

Purdue University, where I work as a researcher and innovation professor, piloted one virtual and facilitated two in-person REU programs between August 2021 and August 2024. We found that the virtual model delivered the same – if not better – learning outcomes at a fraction of the cost.

The 14 students who participated in the virtual REU over the course of one or two semesters reported stronger gains in research skills than those who joined the full-time, in-person summer program.

Virtual learning

There are several reasons why this virtual REU approach likely worked.

First, the virtual students met with faculty mentors more often than students who participated in an in-person REU program.

While summer, in-person undergraduate researchers usually met with their mentors around 10 times over the course of 10 weeks, virtual students met weekly with their mentors over 16 to 32 weeks – sometimes having three times as many meetings.

That regular contact helped students stay on track and dive deeper into their renewable energy-focused projects.

Second, because they weren’t spending time in labs, virtual students spent more time doing the kinds of research activities that prepare them for graduate school, like reviewing academic literature, writing up results and thinking through complex problems. These are the kinds of skills that matter most when students make the leap from college to research careers.

Third, the longer, part-time structure of the virtual program gave students more time to absorb new information, reflect on what they were learning and connect ideas. Instead of cramming everything into a 10-week sprint, they took a marathon approach, which helped them learn more.

And finally, virtual REUs made it possible for more students to join the program – especially for those who couldn’t leave home for the summer due to family or other obligations. In our virtual program, we were able to accommodate 14 students, instead of the 10 students who had previously participated in a lab setting.

Cost-effective research

From a financial perspective, the contrast is striking between virtual and in-person research experiences for undergraduates.

The National Science Foundation recommends budgeting about US$1,550 per student per week for summer REUs. Of that, only $600 goes to the student as a stipend – the rest is spent on housing, meals and travel.

For the cost of offering an in-person summer program to two students, we could serve five in a two-semester virtual REU, or even 10 in a one-semester online version. The potential to reach more students, for longer periods, is undeniable.

In other words, virtual REUs are not just a pandemic-era stopgap. They’re a smarter, cheaper and more inclusive way to deliver on the promise of undergraduate research.

To be sure, there can be some downsides.

While virtual REUs still offer valuable research experience and guidance, students participating in remote programs do miss out on working directly in labs and building natural connections with mentors and peers. Because of this, students can feel less connected and less supported than they would in an in-person program.

Also, not everyone thrives with remote learning.

As the National Science Foundation and other agencies that do scientific research grapple with potentially steep budget cuts, I believe that they should take a hard look at what we’ve learned. Virtual REUs aren’t a compromise – they’re a proven, cost-effective strategy that stretches public dollars while giving students more of what they actually need: access, mentorship and real research experience.

I believe that if the U.S. wants to build the next generation of scientists, engineers and innovators, the government needs to try to meet students where they are – and sometimes, that means meeting them online.

Lisa Bosman receives funding from the National Science Foundation.

– ref. Virtual National Science Foundation internships aren’t just a pandemic stopgap – they can open up opportunities for more STEM students – https://theconversation.com/virtual-national-science-foundation-internships-arent-just-a-pandemic-stopgap-they-can-open-up-opportunities-for-more-stem-students-257853

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Jenn Finders, Assistant Professor of Human Development and Family Studies, Colorado State University

Colorado is the sixth-least affordable state for child care in the nation. Costs for center-based care average 14% of a two-parent household’s median income and 45% of a single parent’s median income. The federal affordability benchmark is just 7%.

Colorado also faces significant shortages in access to slots in licensed child care programs. In 2023, more than 40,000 Colorado parents reported quitting a job, turning down a job or significantly changing a job because of problems with child care.

Recently, several Colorado counties passed measures to subsidize child care through local taxes. Despite these advancements, Colorado’s child care system is facing a fiscal crisis that is likely to affect families and children for years to come.

Child care disruptions for families with infants and toddlers are estimated to cost the state more than US$2.7 billion in lost economic productivity and revenue. Ensuring access to affordable child care supports workforce participation and enhances the well-being of children and families.

I study early care and education policies and programs that promote children’s cognitive, behavioral and social-emotional learning. My research lab at Colorado State University has been investigating the consequences of a lack of access to high-quality, affordable child care on child and family outcomes.

Colorado’s Child Care Assistance Program

Since the late 1990s, the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program has subsidized the cost of child care for parents and caregivers with lower incomes who are working, searching for work or pursuing education. My research shows these subsidies are a critical lifeline that help lower-income families access child care.

Subsidies allow families to prioritize factors other than cost, such as location, in their search for child care. From 2023 to 2024, the Colorado subsidy program served more than 30,000 children in the state. That’s about 10% of those who qualified, which is typical for most states.

A federal March 2024 rule from the Administration for Children and Families caps family co-payments at no more than 7% of household income. It also requires reimbursement rates to reflect the full cost of care, whereas previously subsidy payments were based on what families could afford to pay.

Although intended to improve affordability for families and adequately compensate child care programs, the rule included no additional federal funding. In Colorado, meeting these new requirements is projected to cost the subsidy system approximately $43 million more per year.

These changes, combined with the expiration of COVID-19 relief funding that provided Colorado an additional $465 million to stabilize and expand child care assistance, has created growing financial instability for the subsidy system.

Approximately one-third of Colorado counties are experiencing an enrollment freeze for their child care subsidies. This means new applicants cannot access subsidized care until the freeze is lifted. There is no set timeline for when that will occur.

Without additional funding that would allow the freeze to be lifted, enrollment in Colorado’s Child Care Assistance Program is estimated to decline by 64%, falling from about 30,000 to just 10,000 enrollees. As children age out or families no longer qualify, spots that would normally open up for new enrollees will remain unfilled during the freeze.

Zooming in on Larimer County

I have been studying the impacts of the enrollment freeze in my hometown of Larimer County, Colorado. It’s a geographically diverse region that includes urban centers such as Fort Collins and Loveland, mountain destinations such as Estes Park, and rural agricultural communities. Like elsewhere in the state, child care costs pose a significant financial strain on local families.

A household in Larimer County with a median income of $64,919 and two children under the age of 5 spends approximately 37% of its income on child care. Due to budget constraints, Larimer County has had an enrollment freeze in the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program since February of 2024. The county has effectively paused the intake of new applicants for subsidies.

Recently, we administered surveys to 88 families in Larimer County. Approximately half of those surveyed were currently receiving a subsidy and half had applied but were unable to access it because of the freeze. We compared families using advanced statistical modeling that controlled for any differences between groups, allowing us to isolate the effects of the subsidy freeze on family outcomes.

In unpublished research that is being prepared for peer review, we found families affected by the freeze used fewer paid child care hours, faced higher costs, expressed greater concerns about costs, and reported more difficulty paying for care. They also had less reliable and stable arrangements, were less satisfied with their care, experienced higher child care-related stress and displayed greater risk of depression.

But that’s not all. Families without a subsidy reported missing twice as many workdays. When extrapolated across the 425 families in Larimer County affected by the freeze, this translated to over $2.2 million in lost annual earnings.

Local initiatives driving solutions

Recognizing the gaps in affordable child care, counties across Colorado introduced ballot measures to fund local solutions through tax revenue.

These measures come after the state established a universal preschool program in 2022. The following year, the program provided up to 15 hours per week of tuition-free, high-quality preschool for more than 85,000 children.

Measures in Larimer, San Miguel, Garfield, Pitkin and southwest Eagle counties will directly fund child care through sales or property taxes. Measures in Gilpin, Hinsdale, Ouray and Eagle counties will generate funds through lodging taxes.

In Larimer, voters passed a measure that established an additional countywide sales tax of 0.25%, or 25 cents per 100 dollars. The measure is expected to generate $28 million annually for child care assistance and workforce compensation.

In San Miguel, voters passed a measure to opt-out of a state limit on the existing property tax levy of 75 cents for every 1,000 dollars of assessed property value. This will allow the county to retain nearly $1 million annually to support local child care affordability.

In Eagle County, voters passed a measure approving a lodging tax increase from 2% to 4% on hotel stays and short-term rentals that will raise approximately $4.5 million annually to lower child care costs.

Revenue from these initiatives will provide child care tuition to families, expand child care slots, support quality improvement and raise wages for child care workers.

These local investments cannot by themselves resolve Colorado’s statewide child care funding deficit, but they have the potential to transform access and quality within communities where they are implemented.

Colorado is not alone in these issues. Many other states are facing subsidy enrollment freezes and are exploring regional solutions to stabilize funding.

For example, ballot measures in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Seattle, Washington, also recently passed, providing reliable funding for child care assistance, preschool quality and workforce compensation.

With the uncertainty of the state and federal funding landscape, municipalities across the country may look to Colorado as a model for locally driven strategies that address community needs.

Read more of our stories about Colorado.

Jenn Finders has received funding from the National Science Foundation, Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, and North Central Regional Center for Rural Development.

– ref. Colorado faces a funding crisis for child care − local communities hope to fill the gaps – https://theconversation.com/colorado-faces-a-funding-crisis-for-child-care-local-communities-hope-to-fill-the-gaps-270560