# data[].attributes.headline
(Sae Kawashima)Which is better working from home or office

# data[].attributes.subject
(Sae Kawashima)Which is better working from home or office

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Public servants allowed unlimited work from home days

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 170,000 Australian workers have been given the all clear to work from home as much as they like under a new union agreement.

# data[].attributes.headline
(Retaj Alshammairi) The Impact of Technology on Education

# data[].attributes.subject
(Retaj Alshammairi) The Impact of Technology on Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Technology's impact on K-12 education has been transformative, ushering in a new era of learning characterized by enhanced accessibility, engagement, and personalized instruction.

In recent years, K-12 tech innovation news has made it clear that educational technology has become an integral part of classrooms, influencing teaching methodologies, student interactions, and the overall educational landscape. From interactive digital resources to online learning platforms, technology has given educators innovative tools to create dynamic and inclusive learning environments. Students, in turn, have benefited from increased access to information, personalized learning experiences, and opportunities for collaboration.

While the positive impact is evident, challenges such as equitable access and the need for effective integration strategies continue to shape the evolving relationship between technology and K-12 education.

What is one positive effect technology has had on education?

Looking at K-12 tech innovation news, perhaps the biggest positive impact of technology on education is that of equity of access. Digital learning tools and digital technologies have broken down geographical barriers and provided access to educational resources for students no matter their socioeconomic status or geographic location.

Technology empowers students to take ownership of their learning, expanding opportunities for self-directed and personalized learning experiences. Online courses and educational apps offer flexibility, allowing students to learn at their own pace and tailor their educational journey to suit their individual needs.

Because technology has transformed access to learning tools, students who previously may not have had access to these tools now also have the opportunity to build skills they'll use in college and the workforce. Battling this so-called "opportunity gap" makes personalized learning and skill development more inclusive and accessible.

How technology has impacted students' education

Technology has had a transformative impact on K-12 education. The impact of technology on student learning has revolutionized the way students engage and interact in the classroom. In fact, K-12 edtech innovation news is full of examples of successful and engaging edtech implementations.

One of the most notable changes is the digitization of educational materials. Traditional textbooks are being replaced by interactive e-books and online resources, giving students dynamic and multimedia-rich content that can be updated as the world changes. This shift not only makes learning more engaging but also allows for more up-to-date and easily accessible information.

Edtech has personalized the learning experience for K-12 students. Adaptive learning platforms and educational apps cater to individual learning styles and paces, enabling students to progress at their own rate. This personalized approach helps address the diverse needs of students in a single classroom, fostering a more inclusive learning environment where each student can thrive.

Classroom dynamics have evolved with the introduction of interactive whiteboards, tablets, and other devices. Teachers can incorporate multimedia elements into their lessons, and collaborative tools enable students to work together on projects, fostering teamwork and communication skills that are crucial for their future success.

The impact of technology on student learning also extends beyond the classroom walls. Virtual field trips, online educational games, and video conferencing tools bring real-world experiences into the curriculum, making learning more relevant and connected to students' lives. This interconnectedness cultivates a sense of curiosity and exploration.

How technology is impacting education

Technology has profoundly impacted education, upending traditional teaching methods and reshaping today's learning landscape. As with all innovations, there are positive and negative effects of technology on education. Several key areas highlight the transformative effects of technology on education:

1. Access to Information: The internet has become a vast repository of information, providing students and educators with unprecedented access to a wealth of knowledge. Online resources, educational websites, and digital libraries have expanded the scope of learning beyond the confines of textbooks.

2. Interactive and Engaging Learning: The integration of technology has made learning more interactive and engaging. Virtual simulations, educational games, and multimedia presentations captivate students' attention, making complex concepts more accessible and enjoyable.

3. Efficiency in Administration: Administrative tasks within educational institutions have been streamlined through technology. Digital platforms for enrollment, grading, and communication enhance efficiency, allowing educators to focus more on teaching and students' individual needs.

4. Skill Development for the Digital Age: The integration of technology in education prepares students with essential skills for the digital age. They develop digital literacy, critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration skills that are increasingly crucial in today's workforce.

5. Flexibility in Learning: Online education platforms and digital resources provide flexibility in learning. Students can work through materials at their own pace and from various locations if needed, accommodating diverse schedules and learning preferences.

6. Innovative Assessment Methods: Technology has introduced innovative assessment methods. Digital quizzes, online assignments, and real-time feedback mechanisms offer a more dynamic and varied approach to evaluating students' understanding and progress.

As technology continues to evolve, its role in education is likely to expand, offering even more opportunities for transformative change and improvement in the learning experience.

Why is technology in education important?

The integration of technology in K-12 education is of paramount importance in preparing students for success in the digital age. One key reason, according to research about technology in education, is the enhancement of learning experiences. Technology provides dynamic and interactive tools that engage students in ways traditional methods cannot. Interactive whiteboards, educational apps, and multimedia resources cater to various learning styles, making lessons more accessible, engaging, and effective.

So, what are the technological impacts on education in the United States? For starters, technology fosters personalized learning through adaptive learning platforms and educational software. This individualized approach addresses diverse learning needs, ensuring that each student can progress at their own pace and grasp concepts more thoroughly.

Technology in K-12 education is also instrumental in developing essential 21st-century skills. As the workforce becomes increasingly reliant on digital tools, students need to be proficient in technology from an early age. Exposure to devices, coding activities, and digital collaboration tools equips students with the digital literacy and problem-solving skills necessary for success in a technology-driven society.

Technology also expands access to information and resources. The internet provides a vast repository of knowledge, allowing students to explore subjects beyond the confines of textbooks. Online educational resources, virtual field trips, and educational games enrich the curriculum, offering a more comprehensive and diverse educational experience.

What is the impact of educational technology in teaching and learning?

Educational technology has a profound impact on both K-12 teaching and learning, ushering in transformative changes that enhance the overall educational experience. In terms of K-12 teaching, technology provides educators with powerful tools to engage students and deliver more dynamic and effective lessons. The impact of technology on the academic performance of students and teaching effectiveness cannot be overstated.

Interactive whiteboards, educational software, and multimedia presentations allow teachers to present information in diverse ways, catering to different learning styles and making lessons more engaging and interactive.

Moreover, educational technology facilitates personalized instruction. Through adaptive learning platforms and online resources (just two examples of technologies that improve student learning), customization helps each student receive targeted support and opportunities for enrichment, promoting a more inclusive and effective learning environment.

Collaborative learning is another significant impact of educational technology in K-12 education. Online platforms and tools enable students to collaborate on projects and participate in virtual discussions, whether they're fully-online students, hybrid learners, or are simply not present in their brick-and-mortar schools for one reason or another.

Technology opens up new avenues for exploration and self-directed learning. The internet serves as a vast repository of information, allowing students to delve into subjects beyond the confines of traditional textbooks. Educational apps, games, and simulations make learning more interactive and enjoyable, encouraging students to explore and experiment with concepts in a hands-on manner.

Additionally, technology promotes digital literacy and 21st-century skills. As students interact with digital tools, they develop the skills necessary to navigate the digital landscape, critically evaluate information, and communicate effectively online. These skills are increasingly essential in the modern world and are transferable to various aspects of students' academic and professional lives.

What are examples of positive and negative effects of technology?

Sometimes, a list of pros and cons can be subjective when it comes to technology's impact-and positive and negative effects of technology on education in particular. Some may view certain developments as positive impacts, while others may view them as negative impacts.

Take, for example, the advancement of generative AI in classrooms. Some educators are eager to embrace generative AI and teach students how to learn with such a tool, arguing that developing an AI skillset sets students up for future success in a global workplace. Other educators, however, believe AI is simply an avenue for academic dishonesty and will harm students' individual and critical thinking skills.
Positive effects of technology include:

1. Enhanced Communication: Technology has revolutionized communication, enabling instant and global connectivity through email, social media, and video conferencing. This facilitates efficient and widespread exchange of information.

2. Access to Information: The internet serves as a vast repository of knowledge, providing individuals with unprecedented access to information on a wide range of topics. This democratization of information has empowered people to learn independently.

3. Increased Productivity: Technological tools and software streamline tasks and boost efficiency in various industries. Automation and digital systems contribute to increased productivity and faster completion of complex tasks.

4. Educational Opportunities: Technology in education, such as online courses and educational apps, has expanded learning opportunities globally. It provides access to quality education for individuals who may face geographical or economic barriers.

Negative effects of technology include:

1. Social Isolation: Excessive use of technology, particularly in the form of social media, can contribute to social isolation. People may spend more time interacting online than in face-to-face social settings.

2. Privacy Concerns: The digital age has raised significant privacy issues. The collection and sharing of personal data, surveillance technologies, and the potential for data breaches pose risks to individuals' privacy.

3. Job Displacement: Automation and artificial intelligence have led to concerns about job displacement. Some traditional jobs may be replaced by technology, impacting employment opportunities in certain industries.

4. Health Issues: Prolonged screen time and sedentary behavior associated with technology use can contribute to health issues such as eye strain, disrupted sleep patterns, and a sedentary lifestyle, leading to obesity and related problems.

5. Cybersecurity Threats: The interconnected nature of digital systems makes them susceptible to cyber threats. Hacking, identity theft, and other cybercrimes pose significant risks to individuals and organizations.

What does research say about technology in the classroom?

Research about technology in education suggests an evolving impact on teaching and learning. Based on existing studies:

1. Improved Engagement and Motivation: Many studies highlight that well-integrated technology in the classroom can enhance student engagement and motivation. Interactive and multimedia elements capture students' interest and make learning more enjoyable.

2. Enhanced Learning Outcomes: Adaptive learning platforms, personalized instruction, and digital resources have been associated with increased student achievement and a deeper understanding of subjects, according to recent K-12 tech innovation news.

3. Promotion of 21st-Century Skills: Technology integration is linked to the development of essential 21st-century skills, including digital literacy, critical thinking, and collaboration. Students exposed to technology-rich environments tend to develop skills that are valuable in today's digitally-driven society and workforce.

4. Increased Access to Information: The internet and digital resources have significantly expanded students' access to information. Technology provides a more comprehensive and diverse range of learning materials, allowing students to explore subjects beyond traditional textbooks.

5. Challenges in Implementation: While the potential benefits are evident, research also acknowledges challenges in the implementation of technology in K-12 classrooms. These challenges include issues related to teacher training, infrastructure, equitable access to technology, and the need for ongoing support and professional development.

6. Importance of Pedagogical Integration: Studies emphasize that the success of technology integration relies on effective pedagogical strategies. It's not just about using technology for its own sake, but about incorporating edtech purposefully to enhance teaching methods and to meet specific educational goals.

7. Concerns about Screen Time: Some research raises concerns about the amount of screen time students experience in technologically rich environments. Striking a balance between digital and non-digital activities is essential for maintaining overall well-being.

What are the positives and negatives of using technology in the classroom?

Using technology in the classroom comes with benefits and drawbacks.

Here are 10 positive effects of technology on education:

1. Enhanced Engagement: Technology in the classroom makes learning more interactive and engaging. Educational apps, multimedia, and interactive whiteboards capture students' attention and stimulate interest in the subject matter.

2. Access to Information: Technology provides immediate access to a vast and ever-evolving amount of information. This access allows students to explore topics in depth, conduct research, and stay updated on current events, enriching the learning experience.

3. Personalized Learning: Adaptive learning platforms and educational software tailor instruction to individual student needs. This personalized approach accommodates diverse learning styles and paces, helping students grasp concepts more effectively.

4. Global Connectivity: Technology fosters global connectivity within the classroom. Edtech tools enable virtual collaboration for online projects and discussions.

5. Preparation for the Digital Age: Integrating technology prepares students for the demands of the modern workforce. Familiarity with digital tools and platforms equips them with essential skills for success in a technology-driven society.

6. Efficiency in Teaching: Technology streamlines teaching processes and administrative tasks for educators. Digital tools for lesson planning, grading, and communication allow teachers to manage their workload more efficiently, freeing up time for more focused instruction.

7. Customized Assessments: Technology enables innovative assessment methods, including online quizzes, interactive assignments, and digital portfolios. These tools provide educators with real-time feedback and allow for more nuanced evaluations of students' understanding.

8. Collaborative Learning: Digital platforms and tools facilitate collaborative learning experiences. Students can work together on projects, share ideas through online forums, and collaborate in real-time using collaborative software, preparing them for collaborative work environments.

9. Resource Diversity: Technology expands the range of educational resources available to students. Online textbooks, multimedia presentations, and educational apps offer diverse learning materials that cater to different learning styles and preferences.

10. Life-Long Learning Skills: Technology encourages the development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and digital literacy skills. These skills are not only beneficial for academic success but also prepare students for a lifetime of continuous learning in an ever-evolving technological landscape.

Here are some examples of negative impacts of using technology in the K-12 classroom:

1. Technological Disparities: Access to technology is not uniform, leading to disparities among students. Those with limited access may miss out on the educational benefits of technology, exacerbating existing inequalities in education.

2. Distractions: The presence of technology in classrooms can sometimes lead to distractions. Students may be tempted to use devices for non-educational purposes, impacting their focus on learning tasks.

3. Privacy Concerns: The use of technology often involves collecting and storing student data. Privacy concerns arise regarding how this data is handled, stored, and shared, raising ethical questions about the protection of students' personal information.

4. Overreliance on Technology: There's a risk of overreliance on technology, with educators relying too heavily on digital tools at the expense of traditional teaching methods. This could potentially hinder the development of certain foundational skills.

Conclusion

It's time to embrace the transformative power of technology in K-12 education. As we witness the profound impact of digital tools on learning experiences, it's time for educators, administrators, and policymakers to actively integrate technology into classrooms. We should foster personalized learning, global connectivity, and innovative teaching methods. By investing in teacher training, ensuring equitable access, and promoting responsible technology use, we can empower the next generation with the skills they need for a future defined by innovation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The impact of technology on education has a wide reach, and investing in teacher training and ensuring equitable access are key actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
‘They have broken their promise’: International students left confused and angry by changes to eligibility of graduate work visa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
International students believe the new migration strategy, which slashes the maximum eligible age for a temporary graduate work visa from 50 to 35, is unfair for older students and call on the Australian government to consider their situation.

# data[].attributes.headline
( Sang ) Everything is good in moderation, even social media

# data[].attributes.subject
( Sang ) Everything is good in moderation, even social media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In today's digital age, it has become commonplace to hear peers decry social media as a time-wasting, harmful distraction. There are enough scientific and psychological studies certifying the negative side effects that social media has on its users - especially college students .

Because of its negative effect on mental health or the decrease in students' attention spans and sleep quality, social media has been deemed a destructive digital tool. However, my experiences in high school and college have led me to firmly believe in the positive impact of social media, particularly when it comes to fostering a sense of community among college students.

While I do acknowledge social media's major downsides, I am here to tell you not only the benefits it can have at Wake Forest, but also how to really use it to your advantage.
The benefits of social media
Not only can social media help students feel more seen, but it can also connect us with others who share our interests and values. When I saw my peers posting about things that aligned with my values, I reached out and tried to get to know them until we eventually met in person and became good friends. Through shared posts and interactions, connections are formed, and virtual friendships can blossom into real-life companionships. In this way, social media provides an excellent icebreaker, making it easier for students to initiate conversations and expand their social circles.

As we transition from the virtual world to face-to-face interactions on campus, social media is a helpful tool to navigate college relationships. It allows us to get to know people's interests and personalities before meeting them in person, making the process of finding compatible friends more efficient and enjoyable. Social media functions as a filter for the people we end up befriending throughout college.

Furthermore, I have found that social media can provide some comedic relief that helps us feel connected with others. Accounts like @barstoolwakeforest make light of certain events or experiences that give us topics of conversation to lighten the mood and have another common point of interest.
How to approach using social media
These benefits can be reached if you carefully manage all of the downsides. The key to this is moderation. College can be a bewildering and isolating experience, with students often grappling with unfamiliar surroundings and daunting challenges. Social media - when approached with moderation and intention - can provide an invaluable sense of connection.

You don't want to fall into the rabbit hole of social media as you navigate these accounts, which is why it is imperative that you limit your screen time when making these virtual connections and watching entertaining content. Extremes tend to not be good, and this 100% applies to social media. Try to become more mindful of the way you use it, so it ends up being a beneficial tool rather than a harmful and anxiety-inducing instrument. A study done by Queensland University School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences researcher associate professor Asan Khan showed that there are some benefits, like improved social and communication skills, during the first hour of daily screen use, but detrimental effects of recreational screen use on mental wellbeing kick in after 75 to 105 minutes.

Something that helps me become more mindful of how much time I spend on social media is by following accounts that have a positive impact on me. I try to trick the algorithm, so my feed is filled with funny and good-vibes kind of content. Instead of seeing all of the toxic and draining content that keeps you hooked for hours, try to deviate from that and look for some meaningful and motivating content that will leave you feeling replenished rather than drained.

I believe in social media's ability to promote a feeling of community among college students, despite the conventional narrative that it is harmful. There are ways to mitigate the risks and use social media in a way that positively impacts your everyday life. Social media may help students connect, share and validate their experiences, thereby improving their overall college experience when used intentionally and with mindfulness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everything is good in moderation, even social media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In today's digital age, it has become commonplace to hear peers decry social media as a time-wasting, harmful distraction. There are enough scientific and psychological studies certifying the negative side effects that social media has on its users - especially college students. Because of its negative effect on mental health or the decrease in students'...

# data[].attributes.headline
(Rio Hotta)New Pew survey shows how many men and women change their names when they get married

# data[].attributes.subject
(Rio Hotta)New Pew survey shows how many men and women change their names when they get married

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Younger, educated women are less likely to change their names upon marriage, data shows | CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Women changing their last name when they get married is a strong tradition — but with a difficult past, experts say. New data shows where the trends are and where they may be headed.

# data[].attributes.headline
Abdullah Alshammari  AI optimism: How embracing artificial intelligence is getting workers ahead

# data[].attributes.subject
Abdullah Alshammari  AI optimism: How embracing artificial intelligence is getting workers ahead

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some people find it hard not to panic when reading the latest iteration of the 'AI is going to take your job' headline - especially considering the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence tools in recent years. But Gus Nisbet, a 30-year-old music producer, is excited about what AI has to offer the workplace.

"It's all about co-creation," says Nisbet, who also works as a creative strategist at sonic branding agency MassiveMusic in London. He is already using generative AI tools including OpenAI's ChatGPT to streamline administrative tasks and enhance creative projects. "I'll start up the idea and then use AI to flesh it out and develop it in more varied ways," he says.

Since Nisbet has integrated AI tools into his daily workflow, he's seen a huge surge in efficiency. Tasks that may usually have taken a half-day to complete, like analysing client feedback on a project, can be handled much faster when run through ChatGPT. "If you are using it in the right way, on the right task, you can crunch about four or five hours of work into about 30 minutes," he says. He uses that extra time to focus on the tasks that require complex thinking and creativity.

While the growing capabilities of AI are certainly making many workers anxious, others are embracing the technology. They are already using the tools to improve on-the-job productivity and efficiency. And emerging data shows that there may be more AI optimism in the workplace than headlines - and our own biases - lead us to believe.

Microsoft's annual Work Trend Index, released in May 2023, shows while 49% of people are worried AI will replace their jobs, far more - 70% - would delegate as much work as possible to AI to lessen their workloads.

"Employees are more eager for AI to help with this burden of digital debt than they are afraid of job loss," says Colette Stallbaumer, Microsoft's general manager for Future of Work. According to the report, 64% of workers struggle to get all their work done each day, often due to the constant influx of emails, meetings and other digital distractions. Once workers start experimenting with AI tools, says Stallbaumer, they realise "these tools are not going to replace my job, they're actually going to be able to augment what I can do and my capabilities".

Stallbaumer points to her own workflow, in which she uses AI to manage her meetings. "When every meeting becomes a digital artefact you can engage with it in a whole new way," she says. Stallbaumer will use AI to summarise key points of meetings she's missed and can even ask it to analyse the meeting in real time, to determine what people agree on and what requires further discussion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AI optimism: How embracing artificial intelligence is getting workers ahead

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some people find it hard not to panic when reading the latest iteration of the 'AI is going to take your job' headline - especially considering the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence tools in recent years. But Gus Nisbet, a 30-year-old music producer, is excited about what AI has to offer the workplace.

# data[].attributes.headline
( Vu Ngoc Bao Tran)Don't lower the driving age, warn doctors and road safety experts

# data[].attributes.subject
( Vu Ngoc Bao Tran)Don't lower the driving age, warn doctors and road safety experts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This was published 7 years ago

Updated first published at

Save

Save articles for later

Add articles to your saved list and come back to them any time.

Got it

Normal text size Larger text size Very large text size

More young drivers, and their passengers, would die on Victoria's roads if the probationary driving age was lowered to 17, road safety experts have warned.

Some groups, including the Victorian Farmers Federation and the Law Institute of Victoria, have called for the probationary driving age to be lowered.

Seventeen-year-old Charlotte Verley, pictured on the family farm, believes 17-year-olds should be able to get their probationary licence. Credit: Penny Stephens

But doctors and road safety researchers from across the country have urged the state government to reject the push, arguing it would increase Victoria's road toll.

The Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, which has a long history of road safety advocacy, has pushed for "a national minimum driving age of 18", passenger restrictions and night time curfews "particularly in the first year of driving" and mandated first aid training as part of the licensing system.

"There is much evidence to suggest that the part of the brain that assesses risks and controls impulsive behaviour is not fully developed until about age 25 (23 years in females)," the college said in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry which is now examining the controversial question.

"Therefore, it is logical that licensing at a later age would make for safer drivers and less road trauma in young drivers."

A leading academic on licensing systems, Teresa Senserrick​ from the University of New South Wales, highlighted research showing that when young drivers crash, often they are not the only casualties from the incident.

"National research in the United States has explored who dies in the fatal crashes of novice teenaged drivers. Only 36 per cent of fatalities in crashes of US 15-17-year-old drivers are the actual teen drivers; 32 per cent are their passengers, with the remaining 32 per cent other road users," she said.

She also highlighted stark findings from a study of what happened when the driving age was lowered in Canada.

"When Canada reduced the minimum age from 18 to 16 years, there was a 24 per cent increase in fatalities for new drivers, with additional serious injuries and fatalities of others involved in new driver crashes," she said.

"There is indisputable evidence that reducing the minimum probationary licensing age from 18 to 17 years for all Victorians will increase the road toll - not only of young novice drivers but also of their passengers and other road users with whom they share the roads. This risk cannot be attenuated by any known driver education or training program," she said.

The Australasian College of Road Safety said there was global research that examined the influence of minimum licensing age on road trauma.

"The research strongly demonstrates that a higher provisional licensing age is associated with reduced crashes and fatalities," it said.

"The research strongly indicates that a licensing age of 17 will result in greater road safety benefits than licensure at 16 years, just as a licensing age at 18 will have significant road safety benefits over licensure at 17 years," it said.

Connect via Darren Gray - Darren is the mining and agribusiness reporter for The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. Twitter or email.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Don't lower the driving age, warn doctors and road safety experts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More young drivers, and their passengers, would die on Victoria's roads if the probationary driving age was lowered to 17, road safety experts have warned.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Will weight loss drugs kill the fast food business?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.voanews.com/amp/will-weight-loss-drugs-like-ozempic-take-a-bite-out-of-junk-food-sales-/7298319.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As Americans shed pounds on weight loss drugs like Ozempic, snack food companies could be in for some shrinkage, as well.

"The food, beverage and restaurant industries could see softer demand, particularly for unhealthier foods and high-fat, sweet and salty options," Morgan Stanley food analyst Pamela Kaufman says in a company report.

A survey of 300 people currently taking semaglutide weight loss drugs such as Ozempic showed the medicine can reduce calorie intake by 20% to 30% a day.

The people surveyed said they cut back the most on foods that are high in sugar and fat, reducing their consumption of sweets, sugary drinks and baked goods by up to two-thirds. The survey found 77% of people on weight loss drugs went to fast food restaurants less often, while 74% reduced their visits to pizza shops.

Approximated 1 in 5 American adults is obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"It's all of these food companies [and] beverage companies that have created the obesity," says Angelica Gianchandani, professor of marketing at the University of New Haven in Connecticut. "At one time, it was innovation - creating all these different products and being able to put foods in bags and ziplocks [plastic bags] and easy to carry and transport - that was innovation. But all of this food creation in packaged goods, there's a lot of processed foods, and the impact, if you're not eating in moderation, has created this obesity."

Morgan Stanley analysts estimate that 24 million people, roughly 7% of the U.S. population, will be taking this new class of obesity drugs by 2035. They project that overall consumption of soft drinks, baked goods and salty snacks could fall up to 3% by 2035.

But James Schrager, professor of entrepreneurship and strategy at the University of Chicago, says the snack industry continues to grow, and he doesn't expect the increased use of semaglutides to have a major long-term impact.

"The growth comes from younger users, and younger users may not be the primary target for the drug," he says. "Younger people - who don't become obese usually, or at least in many cases - and who aren't going to be taking the drug."

Schrager says he's worked as a consultant with some of the largest processed food companies in the world, and they are already concerned about providing healthier options.

"Way before this drug, [they worried] that the market will go away," Schrager says. "They very much know that some of these are not good for some people's health. ...They would often say, 'In a health-conscious world, we realize we may be out of business. How do we fix that?'"

The rise in semaglutide use also could cut into other obesity-related industries. The proportion of people paying for weight loss programs fell from 29% to 20% once they started taking the drug, according to the data. Gianchandani says weight loss businesses will pivot to health and wellness to stay afloat.

"And it will require people to have coaches, people to have nutritionists, to help give them a regimented diet to help them monitor," she says. "These weight loss companies will encompass all of that, everything from food programs to coaching and support groups to help them maintain their weight and stay healthy."

The report finds that patients taking the obesity drugs say they're cutting back on sugary carbonated drinks (65%) and alcohol (62%). Almost one-fourth completely gave up alcohol. But Gianchandani says alcohol producers could benefit from the semaglutide craze.

"It's going to capture a whole new market share. For them, it's good," she says, pointing out that alcohol producers are increasingly developing lower-calorie beverages. "They're going to have a new product line to target a whole new demographic, and it will be millions of dollars of a market for them to benefit from."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Will Weight Loss Drugs Like Ozempic Take a Bite Out of Junk Food Sales?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two-thirds of people on weight loss drugs consumed fewer sweet and salty snacks, and carbonated sugary drinks, report finds

# data[].attributes.headline
( TRAN NHAT SON) First patient of Elon Musk's Neuralink brain chip implant demonstrates playing online chess with his mind

# data[].attributes.subject
( TRAN NHAT SON) First patient of Elon Musk's Neuralink brain chip implant demonstrates playing online chess with his mind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In short:The first patient implanted with Elon Musk's Neuralink brain chip has demonstrated himself playing online chess with his mind.

Noland Arbaugh, 29, acknowledged the technology was "not perfect" and they "have run into some issues."

What's next? One US neural engineer said the demonstration was a "good starting point" but work continued.

The first patient of Neuralink, Elon Musk's brain-chip startup, has demonstrated himself using the technology to play online chess with his mind.

Noland Arbaugh, 29, who is paralysed below the shoulder after a diving accident, live streamed himself playing chess on his laptop, moving the cursor using the Neuralink device.

The Neuralink implant seeks to enable people to control a computer cursor or keyboard using only their thoughts.

Mr Arbaugh received an implant from the company in January and could control a computer mouse using his thoughts, Mr Musk said last month.

"The surgery was super easy," Mr Arbaugh said in the live stream on Mr Musk's social media platform X.

"I literally was released from the hospital a day later.

"I have no cognitive impairments."

Mr Arbaugh said he had "basically given up" playing the video game Civilization VI before the implant.

"You all [Neuralink] gave me the ability to do that again and [I] played for eight hours straight," he said.

Elaborating on his experience with the new technology, Mr Arbaugh said it was "not perfect" and they "have run into some issues."

"I don't want people to think that this is the end of the journey, there's still a lot of work to be done, but it has already changed my life," he said.

First implant not a 'breakthrough', says neural engineer

Kip Ludwig, former program director for neural engineering at the US National Institutes of Health, said what Neuralink showed was not a "breakthrough."

"It is still in the very early days post-implantation, and there is a lot of learning on both the Neuralink side and the subject's side to maximise the amount of information for control that can be achieved," he added.

Even so, Mr Ludwig said it was a positive development for the patient that they have been able to interact with the computer in a way they were not able to before the implant.

"It's certainly a good starting point," he said.

Last month, Reuters reported that US Food and Drug Administration inspectors found problems with record keeping and quality controls for animal experiments at Neuralink, less than a month after the startup said it was cleared to test its brain implants in humans.

Neuralink did not respond then to questions about the FDA's inspection.
Reuters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
First patient of Elon Musk's brain chip implant shown playing online chess with his mind

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Noland Arbaugh, who is paralysed from below the shoulder, used the Neuralink chip to play online chess, saying the technology had given him the ability to play video games again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill to ban trophy hunting imports back in front of MPs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
But the parliamentary move has been condemned as counter-productive by several African countries.

# data[].attributes.headline
( Harb Al saidi ) The pros and cons of the death penalty

# data[].attributes.subject
( Harb Al saidi ) The pros and cons of the death penalty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The global movement to abolish the death penalty has continued at pace, as capital punishment becomes increasingly viewed as a human-rights issue.

In 1971, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution that, in order to fully guarantee the right to life (under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), the death penalty should be restricted - with a view to abolishing it altogether. In a landmark ruling (Furman v. Georgia) the following year, the US Supreme Court called death sentences a "cruel and unusual" punishment, "capriciously" applied and "incompatible with evolving standards of decency".

The Council of Europe and the EU both list abolition as a condition of membership, and since the 1990s many African countries have been outlawing the punishment. This summer, Ghana became the 29th country on the continent to abolish the death penalty and the 124th globally. Now, executions are most commonly carried out in China, Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia (although there is little reliable data for countries such as Afghanistan, North Korea and Syria). But critics warn that the death penalty can be used as a tool of state oppression rather than judicial punishment. Public opinion remains extremely divided, even in countries where it has long been outlawed.

The Week takes a look at some of the arguments.

Pro: public support

Although use of the death penalty is gradually disappearing in the US, in 2021 the Pew Research found that more American adults were in favour of it than not. About 60% were in favour for people convicted of murder, including 27% who strongly favoured it.

According to a poll in 2022, 40% of Britons were still in favour of the death penalty, with Conservative voters far more likely to support it (58%), and those aged over 65 more than twice as likely as those aged 18-24.

The last execution in the UK took place in 1964, but there are still calls to reintroduce capital punishment, with supporters arguing that the death penalty would be more cost-effective than feeding and housing an inmate for the whole of a life-without-parole sentence. A new poll for The Spectator also found that 66% of the UK public backed the death penalty as a just punishment for serial baby murderer Lucy Letby.

Con: wrongful execution risk

One of the most "compelling forces" driving worldwide opinions towards the death penalty has been "the increasing recognition of the potential for error in its use", wrote Saul Lehrfreund, co-director of the London-based NGO The Death Penalty Project, in a for the University of Oxford. With justice systems prone to error, bias and coercion, wrongful executions are, in fact, "inevitable".

Since 1993, Washington-based non profit organisation The Death Penalty Information Center has been tracking wrongful executions in the US, going back to the Supreme Court ruling in 1972. In a 2021 report, The Innocence Epidemic, it concluded that at least 185 people had been wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death since 1972. Nearly 70% of those cases involved "official misconduct by police, prosecutors or other government officials" - more so in cases involving a defendant of colour.

"The death penalty has always been, and continues to be, disproportionately wielded against black people and other people of colour," explained the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, regarding the US. As of 2019, "black and Hispanic people represent 31% of the US population, but 53% of death-row inmates".

Pro: could reduce crime

The "commonest justification" for the death penalty is that it functions as a "unique deterrent" for others, wrote Lehrfreund, based on the reasoning that an executed convict will commit no further crimes.

The penalty of death is "the most important catalyst to limiting the imitation of the worst kinds of crimes - principally, murder", wrote Armstrong Williams for . "There must be some form to hold murderers accountable and, historically, the death penalty has been the most effective way of doing so."

When the UK first suspended the death penalty, "many hoped that removing violence from the top end of justice would trickle down through society, making us more civilised", wrote Tim Stanley in The Daily Telegraph. "Instead, crime went up, and today, as predators exploit our liberality, a state without the death penalty resembles a lion tamer without a whip."

Con: not a deterrent

The death penalty has "no deterrent effect", said the American Civil Liberties Union. "Claims that each execution deters a certain number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research."

Most murders are committed either in the heat of passion, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or because of mental illness. The few murderers who plan their crimes "intend and expect to avoid punishment altogether by not getting caught".

The Death Penalty Project concluded after a review of multiple studies that capital punishment "does not deter murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat or application of life imprisonment". In 2021, the Human Rights Council cited studies which showed that some member states that had abolished the death penalty saw their murder rates stay the same, or even decline.

Pro: sense of retribution

Supporters believe that the death penalty provides a sense of retribution for terrible crimes - "an eye for an eye", as expressed in Exodus 21:24 of the Bible.

It is also "often touted as a punishment providing the only way to truly serve justice and offer closure" for friends and family of murder victims, according to a 2007 . However, "such rhetoric oversimplifies and often misrepresents the experiences and perspectives" of these "co-victims".

Con: extremely expensive

Many supporters of the death penalty argue that it is more cost-effective than feeding and housing an inmate for the whole of a life-without-parole sentence. But in countries with arduous appeals processes and strong human-rights organisations, the death penalty is - counterintuitively - far more expensive than imprisonment for life.

More than a dozen US states found in 2007 that death penalty cases were up to 10 times more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases. That year, New Jersey became the first state to ban executions for reasons of "time and money", said .

According to Equal Justice USA, the death penalty in America is "a bloated government program that has bogged down law enforcement, delayed justice for victims' families, and devoured millions of crime-fighting dollars that could save lives and protect the public".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite global trend towards abolition of capital punishment, public opinion on the death penalty remains divided.

# data[].attributes.headline
(Marya AL hilali) What if everyone woke up tomorrow and just stopped eating meat?

# data[].attributes.subject
(Marya AL hilali) What if everyone woke up tomorrow and just stopped eating meat?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Humans eat a stunning amount of meat every year - some 800 billion pounds of it, enough flesh to fill roughly 28 million dump trucks. Our carnivorous cravings, particularly in industrialized, beef-guzzling countries like the United States, are one reason the planet is warming as fast as it is. Raising animals consumes a lot of land that could otherwise soak up carbon. Cows, sheep, and goats spew heat-trapping methane. And to grow the corn, soy, and other plants that those animals eat, farmers spray fertilizer that emits nitrous oxide, another potent planet-warming gas.

For all those reasons, and many more, activists and scientists have called for people to eat less meat or abstain altogether. At last year's United Nations climate conference in Egypt, activists chanted slogans like " Let's be vegan, let's be free." At this year's conference, which wraps up Dec. 12, world leaders are expected to talk about ways to shift diets toward plant-based foods as a way to lower animal agriculture's climate pollution, the source of 15 per cent of the planet's greenhouse gas emissions.

Cutting out meat can be an effective tool: The average vegan diet is linked to about one-quarter the greenhouse gas emissions of a meat-intensive one, according to a paper published in Nature in July.

But what would happen if everyone actually stopped eating meat tomorrow?

"It would have huge consequences - a lot of them probably not anticipated," said Keith Wiebe, a senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute.

Such a quick shift probably wouldn't cause the sort of turmoil that would come if the planet immediately ditched fossil fuels. But still, the upshot could be tumultuous, upending economies, leaving people jobless, and threatening food security in places that don't have many nutritious alternatives.

Livestock accounts for about 40 per cent of agricultural production in rich countries and 20 per cent in low-income countries, and it's vital - economically and nutritionally - to the lives of 1.3 billion people across the world, according to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization. One-third of the protein and nearly one-fifth of the calories that people eat around the world come from animals.

Researchers say the economic damage caused by the sudden disappearance of meat would fall disproportionately on low-income countries with agrarian economies, like Niger or Kenya, where farming and raising livestock are critical sources of income. Niger's livestock industry makes up about 13 per cent of the country's gross domestic product; in the U.S., the entire agricultural system accounts for only around five per cent.

Humans eat a stunning amount of meat every year - some 800 billion pounds of it, enough flesh to fill roughly 28 million dump trucks. #ClimateCrisis #Meat #FoodSecurity #EconomicDamage #PlantBasedFoods

It's tough to predict exactly what the economic shock would look like on a global level. There has been "relatively little" research on how phasing out meat would affect employment around the world, Wiebe said. "It's an issue that deserves a lot more attention."

Millions of people would lose jobs, but demand for other sources of calories and protein might rise and offset some of those losses. Some workers might be drawn into agriculture to grow more crops like legumes. That shift in labour, some researchers hypothesize, could slow economic growth by pulling people out of more profitable industries.

Still, the effects would vary across cultures, economies, and political systems, and they aren't as clear-cut as, say, the amount of methane that would be saved if cows ceased to exist. "It depends on the species of livestock. It depends on the geographic location," said Jan Dutkiewicz, a political economist at the Pratt Institute in New York City. "It's very difficult, if not impossible, to talk in universal terms about addressing those kinds of things."

It's easier to talk in broad terms about another challenge with getting rid of meat: nutrition. Eliminating livestock overnight would deprive many people of essential nutrients, especially in regions like South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, where meat comprises a small but crucial sliver of the average person's starch-heavy diet. Animal-based foods are high in vitamin B12, vitamin A, calcium, and iron. That's why researchers say preserving access to meat, milk, and eggs is key to keeping people healthy in low- and middle-income countries right now, where nutritious plant-based options are harder to come by.

And then there's the issue of cultural damage. Taking away meat, according to Wilson Warren, a history professor at Western Michigan University, would do more than just deprive Americans of hot dogs and hamburgers and Italians of salami.

"Historically, the way that most people understood animals was through farming and having close contact with their livestock," said Warren, who's also the author of Meat Makes People Powerful, a book about the global history of meat. "You get rid of that sort of close connection, [and] I envision people in some ways being even less environmentally in touch." (Warren grapples with this idea in a self-published novel called Animeat's End about a future world in which eating meat is a serious crime.)

Many researchers agree that phasing out meat entirely, let alone immediately, isn't an ideal solution to the climate crisis. It would be plenty, they say, to reduce consumption methodically and to focus on the countries that eat the most, particularly wealthy ones like the United States that have no shortage of alternatives.

It might be easier for the average American, who eats about 220 pounds of red meat and poultry each year, to trade a daily hamburger for a bowl of lentils than for someone in rural sub-Saharan Africa, who eats 10 times less meat, to give up the occasional goat or beef stew for something less nutritious. Such a shift in beef-loving countries also might reduce heart disease and cancer linked to eating a lot of red and processed meat.

Dutkiewicz suggested using guidelines established by the EAT-Lancet Commission, an international group of scientists who have designed a diet intended to give people the nutrients they need without destroying the planet. It consists of roughly 35 pounds of meat per year. Adopting that diet would require a drastic reduction of cows and chickens in countries like the United States, Australia, China, Brazil, and Argentina, and a slight increase in parts of Africa and South Asia.

Gradually replacing meat with plants could have immense benefits for the planet. "It would be a huge net win for the environment," Dutkiewicz said. By one estimate, a complete phaseout of meat over 15 years would cut as much as one-third of all methane emissions and two-thirds of all nitrous oxide emissions. Water use would fall drastically. Biodiversity loss would slow. Animal welfare advocates would be happy to see fewer animals packed into tight pens wallowing in their own poop awaiting slaughter. And there would be ample opportunity to rewild abandoned rangelands and pastures at a scale that would sequester a whole lot of carbon - as much as 550 gigatons, enough to give us a pretty good shot at keeping warming below catastrophic levels.

Given the complexities and pitfalls of a complete phaseout, researchers and advocates have pointed instead to a more modest goal: cutting meat production in half. Replacing it with plant-based alternatives would lower agricultural emissions 31 per cent by 2050, a recent study found.

"It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing approach," Raychel Santo, a food and climate researcher at the World Resources Institute, said in an email.

The solution, in other words, lies somewhere between culling cows in Niger and gorging ourselves on factory-farmed flesh.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What if everyone woke up tomorrow and just stopped eating meat?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our carnivorous cravings - particularly in industrialized, beef-guzzling countries - are one reason the planet is warming as fast as it is.

# data[].attributes.headline
（Moemi Hashimoto）Two-Thirds Order Takeaway Weekly: Too Busy for Cooking

# data[].attributes.subject
（Moemi Hashimoto）Two-Thirds Order Takeaway Weekly: Too Busy for Cooking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many people have questions about animal testing ethics and the animal testing debate. We take our responsibility for the ethical treatment of animals in medical research very seriously. At Stanford, we emphasize that the humane care of laboratory animals is essential, both ethically and scientifically. Poor animal care is not good science. If animals are not well-treated, the science and knowledge they produce is not trustworthy and cannot be replicated, an important hallmark of the scientific method.

There are several reasons why the use of animals is critical for biomedical research:

** Animals are biologically very similar to humans. In fact, mice share more than 98% DNA with us!

** Animals are susceptible to many of the same health problems as humans - cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc.

** With a shorter life cycle than humans, animal models can be studied throughout their whole life span and across several generations, a critical element in understanding how a disease processes and how it interacts with a whole, living biological system.

The ethics of animal experimentation

Nothing so far has been discovered that can be a substitute for the complex functions of a living, breathing, whole-organ system with pulmonary and circulatory structures like those in humans. Until such a discovery, animals must continue to play a critical role in helping researchers test potential new drugs and medical treatments for effectiveness and safety, and in identifying any undesired or dangerous side effects, such as infertility, birth defects, liver damage, toxicity, or cancer-causing potential.

U.S. federal laws require that non-human animal research occur to show the safety and efficacy of new treatments before any human research will be allowed to be conducted. Not only do we humans benefit from this research and testing, but hundreds of drugs and treatments developed for human use are now routinely used in veterinary clinics as well, helping animals live longer, healthier lives.

It is important to stress that 95% of all animals necessary for biomedical research in the United States are rodents - rats and mice especially bred for laboratory use - and that animals are only one part of the larger process of biomedical research.

Stanford researchers are obligated to ensure the well-being of animals in their care, in strict adherence to the highest standards, and in accordance with federal and state laws, regulatory guidelines, and humane principles. They are also obligated to continuously update their animal-care practices based on the newest information and findings in the fields of laboratory animal care and husbandry.

Researchers requesting use of animal models at Stanford must have their research proposals reviewed by a federally mandated committee that includes two independent community members. It is only with this committee's approval that research can begin. We at Stanford are dedicated to refining, reducing, and replacing animals in research whenever possible, and to using alternative methods (cell and tissue cultures, computer simulations, etc.) instead of or before animal studies are ever conducted.

Organizations and Resources

There are many outreach and advocacy organizations in the field of biomedical research.

Stanford Discoveries

What are the benefits of using animals in research? Stanford researchers have made many important human and animal life-saving discoveries through their work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many people have questions about animal testing ethics and the animal testing debate. At Stanford, we emphasize that the humane care of laboratory animals is essential, both ethically and scientifically. Poor animal care is not good science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The NSW government's decision not to forbid controversial forms of animal testing has been described as "incredibly disappointing", after the practices were laid bare during a public inquiry.

An inquiry urged the phasing out of smoking tower tests and forced swim tests

The NSW government has been accused of failing to "recognise the cruelty" of animal research

The inquiry began in 2021 after three baboons escaped from a truck

An inquiry held in state parliament last year recommended that smoking tower tests and forced swim tests (FST), conducted on mice and rodents, be "rapidly phased out" in NSW.

One insider, animal research manager Lisa Craig, told the inquiry those two tests had resulted in "the most horrific animal welfare issues I have seen".

Smoking tower tests study the results of exposing mice or rats to cigarette smoke or other inhalants while stuck inside a small chamber.

In an FST, rodents are placed in containers filled with water too deep for the animal to stand in and from which "escape is impossible," a report by the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) states.

They are said to be used for testing antidepressant drugs - with the theory being that rodents dosed on effective mediation will swim for longer before they stop struggling.

Sarah Toole, an animal welfare officer and veterinarian at Wollongong University, told the inquiry she was aware of rats drowning or later dying from water aspiration after being used in FSTs.

There were also questions raised during the inquiry about the efficacy of such a test as a model for research on a complex and chronic illness such as depression.

Yesterday, the state government responded to the inquiry's recommendations, in which it stopped short of banning or phasing out both tests.

It said the DPI's Animal Research Review Panel (AARP) had already begun a 12-month review of smoke inhalation in rodents, and was considering further regulatory measures.

In November, the AARP also recommended animal ethics committees only approve an FST if there was a "compelling justification" for it, or no viable alternative.

"The Animal Research Review Panel ... considers the FST to have a high negative impact on the welfare of animals," its report states.

Animal Justice Party member Emma Hurst - who sat as the deputy chair on the inquiry's committee - said the government's response was "incredibly disappointing".

Ms Hurst accused the government of failing to "recognise the cruelty in this industry" but said the push to end controversial tests was "far from over".

"This inquiry exposed the shocking reality of what happens to animals in the experimentation industry, a reality that is usually hidden behind closed doors," she said.

"During this inquiry, we heard disturbing evidence of animals having their tails and toes cut off, without even so much as pain relief, of animals killed from excess breeding and huge death rates from cruel experiments like smoking towers."

In a statement, the DPI said the government would "carefully consider" the recommendation to phase out the two tests.

"The NSW government promotes national standards in the ethical, humane and responsible care for and use of animals for scientific purposes," a spokesperson said.

During the inquiry, experienced animal research carer Ms Craig said smoking tests caused the animals to suffer withdrawal and "significant distress between cigarettes".

"Generally, those animals are smoked twice a day ... In many instances, I have seen those animals culled en masse," she said.

The University of Newcastle decommissioned the smoking test a month after its animal care and ethics committee chair defended the procedure before the inquiry.

The inquiry into the use of primates and other animals in medical research began in late 2021, after three baboons escaped from a truck at Sydney's Royal Prince Alfred Hospital.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Cruel' animal experiments still allowed in NSW, despite inquiry's advice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A decision not to phase out tests that expose rodents to cigarette smoke and the danger of drowning is "incredibly disappointing", a NSW upper house member says.