Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Covering the Economy? FAU has the ideal expert to help with your questions and stories
The economy isn’t just a headline, it’s the story behind nearly every headline. From grocery bills and mortgage rates to job growth, small business confidence, and federal policy decisions, economic forces shape daily life for Americans in ways that are immediate and deeply personal. For journalists, that makes the economy a constant, high-stakes beat. Audiences want clear answers: Why are prices rising? Are we headed for a slowdown? What does the Fed’s next move mean for my community? The challenge is cutting through jargon and partisan spin to deliver insight that’s accurate, grounded, and understandable. That’s where William Luther, Ph.D., stands out. A respected economist and Associate Professor at Florida Atlantic University, Luther brings serious academic credibility, but explains economic trends in plain language that resonates beyond the classroom. His expertise in monetary policy, inflation, unemployment, cryptocurrency, and economic growth makes him a valuable resource for breaking news, enterprise stories, and long-form analysis alike. Whether reporters are covering Florida’s housing market, national interest rate decisions, or the future of digital currency, Luther offers thoughtful, balanced analysis that helps audiences understand not just what’s happening, but why it matters. William Luther, Ph.D., is an expert in monetary economics and macroeconomics. He is an associate professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, director of the American Institute for Economic Research’s Sound Money Project, and an adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives. The Social Science Research Network currently ranks him in the top five percent of business authors. View his profile Recent media coverage: ABC News Others downplayed the likelihood of a meaningful loss of Fed independence, since news of the DOJ investigation of Powell drew a rare degree of Republican opposition. Powell holds only a single vote on the 12-member board responsible for setting interest rates, they said. “Anytime we’re changing institutions, we should have some concern,” William Luther, a professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, told ABC News. “At the same time, we should recognize the institutional safeguards we have are pretty strong.” Newsweek William Luther, associate professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, said that the immediate net financial loss to those in Florida, and all Americans, appears to be "very, very large." Luther added Florida should expect a short-term "sharp contraction" in real estate and tourism, both vital sectors for the state's economy. NPR At the moment, the economy is performing very well. It wasn't performing very well not too long ago, both because of the pandemic, which reduced our ability to produce goods and services quite significantly, and then, as a result of some of the policy responses to that pandemic, we had very high inflation. NBC Will Luther, an economics associate professor at Florida Atlantic University, acknowledged the concerns among students. "Absolutely, there are students very much concerned with whether or not they will be able to get a job when they finish here. The good news is that they will. The bad news is it's a little harder right now than it was, say, two years ago," Luther said. Fox Nation FAU's William Luther joins Fox Nation's Deep Dive, hosted by the Wall Street Journal's Mary Anastasia O'Grady, to discuss the economic impact of cryptocurrencies. Video courtesy of Fox Nation's Deep Dive.
Op-Ed: Crypto innovation needs stability, not shortcuts
After months of bipartisan negotiations, Congress continues to debate crypto market structure legislation, though questions remain whether common sense investor protections will be included in a new federal framework for digital assets. These proposals address fundamental questions aimed at providing needed clarity for digital asset markets, including around agency jurisdiction, and trust and confidence for mainstream adoption of modern markets. At times, the negotiations fractured over stablecoin yields, while provisions addressing decentralized finance and developer liability and the importance of investor safeguards have proven similarly divisive. The GENIUS Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest, recognizing such payments transform digital tokens into bank deposits requiring regulatory oversight. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation – an unfair regulatory arbitrage that disadvantages prudentially supervised banks, drains funding from local lending and introduces systemic risk without corresponding accountability. While these complex issues require careful calibration, there is no substitute for keeping investor-first reforms at the center of market structure legislation and prioritizing clear rules and robust investor safeguards that ensure digital assets benefit everyday investors and that America strengthens its economic competitiveness and leads the next era of financial innovation. Such impasses reflect a pattern where narrow interests prevail over broader economic considerations. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation. Banking institutions recognize that unregulated competition operating under lower-cost structures will drain funding from local lending. Both positions are economically rational for the parties involved. Neither serves the public interest in financial stability. Likewise, opponents argue that regulation stifles innovation, especially in decentralized finance. But this conflates innovation with regulatory arbitrage. Genuine technological progress creates value by improving efficiency or reducing costs. Regulatory arbitrage extracts value by exploiting gaps between economically equivalent activities subject to different rules. The alternative claim – that existing securities laws suffice – ignores that those frameworks were designed for different market structures. Securities laws assume centralized issuers. Commodity regulations assume physical delivery. Digital assets often fit neither category cleanly, creating uncertainty that inhibits legitimate activity while failing to prevent abuse. The choice is not between perfect legislation and the status quo but between establishing clear rules now or waiting for the next crisis. Financial regulation written in crisis tends toward overcorrection that stifles markets for years. Regulation developed deliberately better balances stability with innovation. Both House and Senate committee versions share core elements providing needed clarity on agency jurisdiction, registration requirements and disclosure standards. International considerations reinforce urgency. The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation provides comprehensive frameworks for issuers and service providers. Continued U.S. regulatory ambiguity cedes leadership to jurisdictions that may not share American economic interests. More immediately, delay allows risks to accumulate as digital assets become interconnected with traditional finance through retirement plans and institutional portfolios. Recent market failures demonstrate why regulatory clarity and investor safeguards matter. The 2022 collapse of crypto exchange FTX revealed an $8 billion dollar deficit in customer accounts, spreading losses to pension funds and individual retirement accounts. Investigators identified conflicts of interest and leverage that standard regulation would have prevented. When Silicon Valley Bank failed, one major stablecoin had 8% of reserves tied to that institution. The crisis resolved only because uninsured depositors received public support. These episodes reveal a pattern where institutions operating outside prudential supervision accumulate risks requiring public intervention. Markets function best when rules are clear, consistently enforced and apply equally to all participants. This principle applies whether the market involves energy commodities, agricultural credit or digital assets. Louisiana's economy depends on community banks that understand local conditions and maintain lending relationships through economic cycles. When regulatory gaps allow deposit flight to lightly supervised alternatives, these institutions lose capacity to serve small businesses and agricultural operations. Congress has made meaningful progress on consensus-driven legislation. Completing that work would provide clarity allowing legitimate innovation while preventing regulatory arbitrage that creates systemic risk. The alternative is waiting for the next crisis to demonstrate why such frameworks were necessary.
Carney Cares. The Tax Code Doesn’t.
Retirement analyst and author Sue Pimento looks more closely at the just-announced "Canada Groceries & Essentials Benefit Program" in the broader context of the country's overall tax-and-benefit system. A closer analysis of steep GIS clawbacks layered on top of taxes shows that some seniors face tax rates comparable to those of the country's highest earners. Pimento argues that we should address this “participation tax” to ensure seniors earn more without being penalized for their work. Prime Minister Mark Carney just announced the Canada Groceries and Essentials Benefit. The intent is good. The relief is welcome. The tax code, however, did not get the memo. Important Disclaimer (Please Read) This article is for educational and discussion purposes only and does not constitute financial or tax advice. Canada's tax and benefit system is complex, highly individualized, and subject to frequent changes. Before making any financial or tax decisions, consult a qualified professional familiar with seniors' benefits, including GIS, OAS, CPP, and related clawbacks. Now that we've cleared that up, let's talk… Here’s a quick overview of what was announced. What the Canada Groceries & Essentials Benefit Program Covers Bigger Benefit Cheques: About 12 million Canadians will receive relief. Food Bank Relief: $20 million to food banks through the Local Food Infrastructure Fund. Food Supply: Immediate expensing for greenhouse buildings to bolster domestic production. Food Security: A national strategy including unit price labelling and enforcement by the Competition Bureau. Business Support: $500 million in supply chain support to help businesses absorb costs rather than passing them on to consumers. These ideas aren’t bad. Some are very sensible. Taken together, the Government estimates in its announcement that these measures would "provide up to an additional $402 to a single individual without children, $527 to a couple, and $805 to a couple with two children. They go on to say that at these levels, Canada’s new government will be offsetting grocery cost increases beyond overall inflation since the pandemic." On paper, this looks helpful. Unfortunately, paper has never had to buy groceries. But… You knew there was a “but” coming. Government announcements are legally required to include one. A Little-Known Tax Reality That Makes You Shake Your Head New research shows Canada's tax-and-benefit system disadvantages low-income seniors who work. The issue? It's hidden in the tax code. On January 28, 2026, a Zoomer Radio Fight Back discussion hosted by Libby Znaimer highlighted the issue. Guests included: • Gabriel Giguère, Senior Policy Analyst, Montreal Economic Institute • Jamie Golombek, Managing Director, Tax & Estate Planning, CIBC Financial Planning & Advice Their conclusion? Canada's tax system discourages low-income seniors from working exactly when they need income the most. Many seniors discover (usually the hard way) that a small side hustle doesn't always pay off. It can lead to higher taxes and benefit clawbacks. Work a little more, and Ottawa takes a lot more. Why Seniors Are Still Working Because the math doesn't add up. Either way. More than 600,000 older adults live below the poverty line. Meanwhile, rent, food, utilities, insurance, and property taxes are increasing faster than pensions ever did. More seniors are employed, particularly GIS recipients. MEI analysis indicates that GIS recipients with work income increased by 56% from 2014 to 2022, rising to 64% among those aged 65–69. These seniors aren't working for "fun money." They're working to keep the lights on and purchase medication. Reviewing the details reminded me of a long-standing issue in my research on income and cash flow for Canadians aged 55 and over. Many Canadians can’t make ends meet and are forced to work well past 65. Yet Canada’s tax system punishes low-income seniors for working—exactly when they need income most. To understand why, we need to look at the Guaranteed Income Supplement. The Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) Program for Low-Income Seniors Here's how the GIS benefits work: • A non-taxable monthly benefit on top of Old Age Security for low-income seniors. • Roughly one-third of OAS recipients also receive GIS—over 2 million Canadians. • For a single senior with no other income, the maximum annual benefit is about $13,000. (Source: Government of Canada GIS website) The program has done meaningful work. Combined with OAS, CPP, and private pensions, Canada dramatically reduced senior poverty over the past half-century. But there’s a catch hiding in the design. Think of GIS as a hug that tightens when you try to stand up. The GIS Clawback Problem for Canadians GIS recipients can earn only $5,000 per year in employment income before clawbacks begin. After that, GIS takes back 50 cents of every dollar earned—before income tax and payroll deductions. A partial exemption applies to the next $10,000, where 25–37.5% is clawed back. The program helps seniors—right up until they try to help themselves. How the GIS Clawback Works Against Working Seniors Let me illustrate this. Meet Agnes. She is about to learn more about marginal tax rates than any bookstore employee should. Agnes is between 65 and 69 years old, lives alone, and receives OAS and CPP. Rising costs push her to take a job at a local used bookstore. She works about 15 hours a week at roughly minimum wage. Here annual gross employment income is about $13,000 Here’s what happens: • Her employment income triggers GIS clawbacks once she exceeds $5,000. • She pays income tax, CPP contributions, and sometimes EI premiums. • Between taxes and clawbacks, much of her earnings disappear. Simple version: Agnes works more hours but keeps far less than expected. When you keep 20 cents on the dollar, even capitalism looks confused. Agnes didn’t go back to work for the thrill of alphabetizing mystery novels. She did it to afford her prescriptions. A Canadian Tax System That Punishes the Wrong Thing If we’re going to test income, test investment income. Fine. Tax it. But employment income? Showing up? Working? The system treats that like misconduct. Once you add income tax, CPP contributions, and the loss of other credits, low-income seniors can face effective marginal tax rates of 70–80% on modest earnings. Nothing says “fairness” like taxing a bookstore clerk harder than a boardroom executive. As Gabriel Giguère of the Montreal Economic Institute has noted, "this level of taxation normally applies to wealthy Canadians—not seniors living in poverty." In a well-researched economic brief, Giguère and Jason Dean, Assistant Professor of Economics at King’s University College at Western Ontario, present a compelling argument for policy change. This comment by Giguère and Dean nicely sums up their key findings: "For various reasons, including insufficient pensions to maintain their living standards, seniors are increasingly turning to work. Yet the current tax-and-benefit system merits reform as it undermines their efforts, with the harshest effect on low-income seniors." One-Time Credits Don’t Fix Structural Problems At Davos, Mark Carney famously said, “Nostalgia is not a strategy.” Fair point. So why does our benefit system still behave as if retirement lasts ten years and ends with a gold watch? The system still thinks retirement lasts ten years and includes a gold watch. People are living longer. Many will spend 25 to 30 years in retirement. Some want to work. Many need to. A grocery credit helps. But a broken incentive structure still breaks people. Common Sense Tax Solutions the Canadian Government Should Consider 1. Raise the GIS earnings exemption The Montreal Economic Institute recommends raising it to around $30,000. Estimated cost: $544 million annually. Modest relative to the program’s size. 2. Exempt employment income from GIS clawbacks (at least partially) Keep testing investment income. Stop penalizing work. 3. Rethink retirement assumptions Policy built around “retire at 65 and earn almost nothing” no longer matches reality. None of these ideas are radical. They’re just… current. What to Ask Your Accountant About Your Tax Rate Get professional advice. Not generic advice. Not from Google. Not from your unemployed nephew. Ask specifically about: • Pension income splitting • Strategic RRSP contributions • Consulting or corporate structures where appropriate • Creative but compliant barter arrangements • CPP and OAS deferral strategies • Documentation. Lots of documentation. When clawbacks are involved, paperwork is your lifeboat. A Short, Honest Take Grocery relief is appreciated. The intent is good. But until Canada fixes a tax system that punishes low-income seniors for working, affordability will remain fragile. This isn’t about blame. It’s about aligning incentives with reality. Right now, it feels like we’re helping seniors swim by handing them bigger life jackets—while quietly drilling holes in the boat. And yes… I need to lie down. I feel another blog coming on. Apparently, exercising this much common sense counts as cardio. Sue Don't Retire...Re-Wire! Want more of this? Subscribe for weekly doses of retirement reality—no golf-cart clichés, no sunset stock photos, just straight talk about staying Hip, Fit & Financially Free.
Aston University economists say Prime Minister can reduce UK trade vulnerability with China visit
Greenland episode exposed UK’s lack of effective response to economic coercion from allies Research shows tariff retaliation would have cost the average UK household up to £324 per year Economists say China visit is “portfolio risk management” – diversification reduces vulnerability. The Prime Minister’s visit to China – the first by a British PM since 2018 – is an opportunity to reduce the UK’s vulnerability to economic coercion, according to new research from Aston University. A policy paper from Aston Business School’s Centre for Business Prosperity analyses the January 2026 Greenland tariff episode, when President Trump threatened and then withdrew tariffs on eight European countries. The researchers found that the UK had no good options: retaliation would have made Britain worse off, while absorbing the tariffs left Europe without credible deterrence. Director of the centre for business prosperity, Professor Jun Du, said: “The Greenland episode was a wake-up call. When your principal security ally threatens economic coercion, the old assumptions about who is safe and who is dangerous no longer hold. “The PM’s China visit should be framed as portfolio risk management – building diversified trading relationships that reduce the UK’s exposure to any single partner. Just as investors don’t put all their money in one stock, countries shouldn’t put all their trade into one basket. A UK with multiple strong partnerships is harder to pressure, whether the pressure comes from Washington or Beijing.” The research found that coordinated UK–EU tariff retaliation would have cost British households up to £324 per year – the worst outcome modelled. But the authors argue that Europe has untapped leverage elsewhere: the US runs a €148 billion annual services surplus with the EU, and mutual investment exceeds €5.3 trillion. Associate professor of economics and co-author, Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo, said: “Tariff retaliation fails because it hurts consumers and distorts the economy – the retaliator suffers similarly to the target. But Europe has cards it isn’t playing. Services, investment screening, and regulatory access are pressure points where Europe can respond effectively.” UK exports to China fell by 10.4% in the year to Q2 2025, with goods exports down 23.1% – the sharpest decline among major trading partners. The researchers argue that this closes off the UK’s largest alternative market at precisely the moment US reliability is in question. The paper identifies three priorities for UK policy: Recognise the permanent incentives behind US tariffs. US tariff revenue hit $264 billion in 2025. Trade negotiations alone cannot resolve revenue-driven policy. Build UK–EU coordination on non-tariff instruments. Services, investment, procurement, and regulation offer leverage that tariffs do not. Treat China engagement as portfolio risk management. Concentration in any single market creates vulnerability. Diversification is not about picking sides – it’s about resilience. Professor Du added: “The question for the Prime Minister is whether to use this breathing space to build resilience – or wait for the next Greenland.” To read the policy paper in full, click on this link:
Augusta University public health experts discuss building recovery through economic stability
In this candid conversation, Vahé Heboyan, PhD, and Marlo Vernon, PhD, talk about their work at the intersection of public health, economic stability and substance use disorder recovery. The interviews are centered on Augusta University's public health-driven small business training initiative and explore how recovery is strengthened when communities invest in people and provide practical paths to long-term stability. Heboyan, a professor in AU's School of Public Health and a public health expert with a background as an economist, explains that economic vulnerability often hinders recovery, especially in rural areas with limited resources where risk-taking can be costly. He translates economic research into public health practice, emphasizing that small businesses and microenterprises are about providing a sustainable income for individuals and families, not creating large corporations. This stability, he notes, can have a ripple effect, supporting local economies, job opportunities and community resilience. Vernon, whose research focuses on maternal and infant health, as well as substance use disorder recovery, highlights the human side of recovery and the importance of financial security for families. She notes that economic instability can increase the risk of relapse, especially for mothers in recovery who are supporting children. Her insights show that entrepreneurship can be a public health tool, addressing income, dignity, confidence and long-term wellbeing. Both interviews emphasize the key role of community in recovery. Heboyan points out the power of peer support and shared experience, noting how participants use their past challenges as strengths. Vernon agrees, emphasizing that effective public health work requires building relationships and engaging with communities over time, rather than just conducting short-term research. Together, the interviews show that recovery is part of a larger ecosystem that includes economic opportunity, mentorship and community trust. The video illustrates how combining economics, public health and lived experience can create lasting, meaningful impact for individuals in recovery and their communities. Looking to know more? Click on Dr. Vernon's profile below. To connect with Dr. Heboyan, simply contact AU's Communications team via email (mediarelations@augusta.edu) to arrange an interview today.
Long proclaimed Italy’s “moral capital,” Milan is renowned worldwide for its significant contributions to fashion, design and the arts. Soon, another point of pride will be added to the city’s storied history, when the regional hub—and partnering town Cortina d’Ampezzo—plays host to the 2026 Winter Olympics in February. Luca Cottini, PhD, is a professor of Italian Studies and an expert on the evolution of Italian culture, particularly through the 19th and 20th centuries. Recently, he shared some thoughts concerning Milan and Cortina’s successful joint bid for the Olympics, the themes and iconography expected to define this year’s opening ceremony and the symbolic significance of Italy’s selection as a host nation. Question: What was the role of past major events in Milan and Cortina—like the 2015 World’s Fair and the 1956 Winter Olympics—in helping to elevate their appeal for these games? Luca Cottini: I’ll start by saying that although people notice world’s fairs less than the Olympics, they are more impactful to a city and country because they generate more revenue, business, political relationships and positive reputation. They are events in which all the world comes together and each country exposes its excellence, while the host nation brings a visibility that it would not carry otherwise. In 2015, Milan hosted the world’s fair, which generated a completely new fairgrounds area and a visibility of politics, industry, technology and modernity in a way that brings the city to a global stage. I would say that is when the ascent of Milan really started, especially as a desirable destination. With Cortina, after the 2015 World’s Fair—and especially after the COVID-19 pandemic—the Dolomites became really a popular region for travelers to visit. Cortina is also symbolic to Olympic history, because it's the site of the first Olympics that took place in Italy, in 1956 during the reconstruction era. That was the Dolce Vita period, in the middle of the 1950s economic boom, and those games were followed by Rome’s Summer Olympics in 1960. They both represented a way in which Italy, coming out of the war destroyed, was reaffirming its rebirth. Over the years, fewer cities have wanted to host the Olympics because they tend to carry a lot of economic burden, financial debt and little return on investment. In this sense, Milan and Cortina, helped by increased popularity after the world’s fair, sold themselves as a sustainable Olympics. Ninety percent of the buildings were refurbished from older buildings, and they will serve purposes after the Olympics. It’s difficult to tell whether it’s economically sound or not, but it is a way to promote two cities that are in big moments of growth. Q: These Olympic Games will be celebrating Milan’s contributions to fashion. What is the city’s significance to the fashion world? LC: Milan is certainly the capital of fashion in Italy, and is one of the capitals of fashion in the world, along with Paris, New York and London. The fashion heritage that the city carries now in iconic brands like Armani, Versace, Moschino and Dolce & Gabbana is the outcome of a process that took shape in the late 1970s. Until then, fashion in Italy was mainly related to Rome, through cinema, and Florence, as that city represented a new Renaissance in the postwar years. But in the 1970s, much of this fashion world moved from those cities to Milan, because there was a conglomeration of labor, skills, capital and creativity that generated a complex productive and cultural system, or the so-called “Sistema Moda.” This is a particular approach to the industry in Italy that coordinates management and creativity around the figures of a big creative director and a big manager who work together in creating not just nice styles, but also sustainable outlets and markets in and outside Italy. In turn, with its reputation, Milan gives the Olympics that seal of grandeur and coolness. The connection with fashion and promotion of uniqueness is part of the national rhetoric that surrounds what we call “Made in Italy,” this idea of luxury, styling, beauty, order and measure that is endowed in the Italian DNA. Q: Andrea Bocelli—who also appeared in Torino’s 2006 closing ceremony—is supposed to sing once again in this year’s opening ceremony. Aside from his popularity, what is the symbolic significance of his selection as a performer? LC: Bocelli is an interesting case. He is a prototypical Italian success story, which is born in the peninsula but is then ratified outside of Italy. As Bocelli became a global sensation in the U.S., he then came back to his roots in Italy, where his voice has become a symbol of national unity, as epitomized in his solo concerto of Milan, during the pandemic, when he sang in front of the empty Piazza del Duomo, facing the city’s cathedral. In his Catholic faith and secular operatic repertoire, he symbolizes Italian culture as a similar piazza or open space where different voices can converge in a temperate balance. When you put together Bocelli, Mariah Carey and whoever else will be part of the ceremony, that same Italian identity will give rise to a new synthesis, as the encounter of tradition and novelty, grounded-ness and openness. Q: The Olympic flames are supposed to be lit in two cauldrons—one in Milan and one in Cortina—each with a design inspired by Leonardo da Vinci. What was da Vinci’s importance to Milan, specifically? LC: Da Vinci is part of the fabric of Milan. He spent 20 years in the city, painting “The Last Supper” and working at Castello Sforzesco, as well as many other places. His footprint is all over Milan, in its design, walls, canal system and more. He is an archetype of the Italian mind in as much as it represents the combination of engineering and beauty. The word Ingenium in Latin, meaning “genius,” overflows in English into the word “engineering” and also “ingenuity,” which reflects the creative mind. Da Vinci represents the synthesis of Italian Ingenium as a combination of aesthetics and problem solving, which you still see in the city today.
Machiavellianism boosts CEO pay, study finds
In an extensive study examining the relationship between personality traits and executive pay, CEOs who exhibit more Machiavellianism, characterized by motivation to achieve personal goals and 'win' social interactions, are more likely to have higher total pay and severance pay and to secure higher pay for those on their top management team. Aaron Hill, Ph.D., an associate professor at the University of Florida Warrington College of Business, and his co-authors determined that CEO's who scored higher on Machiavellianism were more motivated and successful in their negotiations. The team used a longitudinal sample of S&P 500 firms to compare compensation data with the executives' personality traits collected by expert clinical psychologists’ analyses of public video recordings. “Broadly, we find that CEO Machiavellianism positively relates to their own pay, their severance pay and the pay of their C-Suite or top management team,” Hill said. “The latter effect – on top management team pay – we find then predicts CEO pay raises. Our findings suggest that in this way, CEOs higher in Machiavellianism may pay their top management team members more to set up their own pay raises.” The team’s research highlights an underlying bias in how this trait can affect pay decisions. In response, those who set pay, such as boards of directors, should work on policies that reinforce the behaviors they want in their executives. They should also place leaders in a position to succeed and accentuate the positive aspects of their innate tendencies. “We all have tendencies that present tradeoffs in terms of having some positive aspects and some negative aspects,” Hill said. “Hopefully, as managers, we can acknowledge those and work to accentuate the positives and limit the potential downsides – in effect, take advantage of the positives and work to mitigate the negatives.” This research is published in the Journal of Applied Psychology.
Professor Ian Maidment is a professor in clinical pharmacy at Aston Pharmacy School His inaugural lecture will explain why patients struggle with taking medication and present possible solutions to the problem Professor Maidment is a former practising pharmacist and an expert in medication optimisation and management in mental health and dementia. Professor Ian Maidment, professor in clinical pharmacy at Aston Pharmacy School, will give a public lecture about his life’s work on 5 February 2025. In his inaugural lecture, Professor Maidment will reflect on his journey from a childhood in Kent to becoming a leading researcher in clinical pharmacy. After more than two decades working in the NHS, in community pharmacy, mental health, dementia care, and leadership roles, he joined Aston University in 2012. His research focuses on the real-world challenges of medication optimisation for patients, carers, and healthcare professionals. The title of Professor Maidment’s lecture is ‘Medication adherence: Why it matters and how we can improve it’. Every year, the UK spends nearly £21 billion on medicines. Yet up to half of people with long-term conditions do not take their medication as prescribed—a problem known as non-adherence. This has profound clinical consequences and significant financial implications for the NHS. Professor Maidment will draw on his experience to explore how factors such as medication burden and side-effects influence adherence, the challenges posed by conditions such as dementia and severe mental illness, the role of pharmacy in supporting adherence and why tackling non-adherence requires a system-wide approach. He will also offer practical solutions to one of healthcare’s most persistent problems. Professor Maidment said: “We need to understand why patients struggle to take their medication and then develop and test solutions that work well.” The lecture on Thursday 5 February 2026 will take place at Aston Business School. In-person tickets are available from Eventbrite. The public lecture will begin at 18:00 GMT with refreshments served from 17:30 GMT. It is free of charge and will be followed by a drinks reception. The lecture will also be streamed online.
Florida scientists champion ‘Food Is Medicine’ movement to tackle national health crisis
University of Florida researchers are calling for a national transformation in how we address the ongoing epidemic of obesity and Type 2 diabetes, starting with a fundamental shift in how we approach health, agriculture and food. Published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the article argues that fruits and vegetables must be treated not just as food — but as medicine. With 73% of U.S. adults and 35% of children classified as overweight or obese, the authors warn that the crisis is not only an individual health issue but a national economic and security threat. Andrew Hanson, Ph.D., a co-author and professor of horticultural sciences at UF/IFAS, emphasized a sense of urgency and collective responsibility toward solving this health crisis. “This isn’t business as usual. We’re taking a public-interest view. This is the kind of thing we all need to be talking about. It’s too important not to,” he said. The article proposes a roadmap for change, including creating five National Institutes of Health-supported “Food Is Medicine” centers across the U.S., with Florida as a leading candidate; scaling up domestic fruit and vegetable production to meet national dietary needs; partnering with food producer and processors to make healthy foods more accessible, affordable and appealing; and reforming medical and nutrition education to include horticultural sciences and vice versa. The article highlights that only 1 in 10 adults meets the recommended daily intake of fruits and vegetables, and that U.S. production falls far short of what’s needed to support a healthy population. The authors call for a dramatic expansion of fruit and vegetable production, especially high-impact crops like berries, leafy greens and carrots. Christopher Gunter, Ph.D., professor and chair of the UF/IFAS Department of Horticultural Sciences, said the team’s goal is to push the role fruit and vegetables crops can play in improving human health into the national consciousness. “As a discipline, horticulture and the science of fruit and vegetables have been largely ignored in this conversation,” Gunter said. “Our goal is to move the needle on health with fruit and vegetables.” Hanson said about 80% of the nation’s cropland is used to grow soybeans, corn and wheat — most of which are processed into products with low nutritional value that contribute to the obesity and Type 2 diabetes epidemic. Mike Jaffee, M.D., a co-author and professor of neurology in the UF College of Medicine, stressed the broader implications of a high-vegetable diet on brain health. “Obesity and insulin resistance are linked to inflammation and neurodegeneration. We’re living longer, but our brains aren’t keeping up. That’s where the real cost to individuals and the health care system comes in,” he said. Gunter agreed, adding, “This epidemic reduces the longevity and productivity of our citizens. It limits the momentum communities need to grow healthy and resilient families.” Hanson pointed out that higher socioeconomic groups are better positioned to meet dietary recommendations, making this not just a health issue, but a deeply embedded social and economic one. “This crisis takes an unduly large toll on people with lower incomes and less time. To eat enough fruits and vegetables in the current system, you need substantial income and time to prepare food. That’s a luxury many don’t have,” he said. The authors argue that farmers bring essential knowledge to the table. “They understand how environmental factors impact nutritional quality,” Gunter said.
The year was 2003, and John Speich, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering, felt like he had a clear sense of the direction his burgeoning career was heading in. Speich had recently completed his doctorate in mechanical engineering from Vanderbilt University, where he concentrated on robotics. Following Vanderbilt, Speich went on to become an associate professor at the Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) College of Engineering, working with students in the Department of Mechanical & Nuclear Engineering. Leveraging his robotics expertise, Speich planned to continue his work developing robotics for medical surgery and rehabilitation. Then Speich got a call from Paul Ratz, Ph.D., a professor at the VCU School of Medicine, asking for assistance that would change the entire focus of Speich’s career. Ratz used a small robotic lever that moved up and down just a few millimeters to stretch tiny strips of bladder muscle and rings of artery, trying to determine how different chemical compounds changed the mechanical properties of the muscle. Speich was intrigued—this was a form of mechanical engineering. “In mechanical engineering, we pull on things to determine the mechanical properties,” says Speich. “Here, Dr. Ratz was pulling on pieces of bladder instead of the typical substances mechanical engineers are known to work with, like steel, aluminum or plastic.” Speich and Ratz began working together in 2003, and now, because of that unique partnership, nearly all of the research Speich does is about the bladder. “Before I started working with Dr. Ratz, I had never even heard the words neurourology or urodynamics,” says Speich. “Now, Neurourology and Urodynamics is the name of the journal I publish in the most.” Today, Speich collaborates on bladder biomechanics with two doctors at VCU Health. Adam Klausner, MD is a urologist and the interim chair of the new Department of Urology at VCU. Linda Burkett, MD is a urogynecologist from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; prior to medical school, Burkett completed her bachelor’s degree in Biomedical Engineering from the VCU College of Engineering. Together, Speich, Klausner and Burkett aim to find non-invasive methods to characterize and diagnose overactive bladder, with the goal of allowing doctors to precisely match patients with the most effective treatments. A number of students across the VCU College of Engineering and VCU School of Medicine have aided in their research, including recent Biomedical Engineering graduate Mariam William. Speich’s primary methods of research involve Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS)—a non-invasive technology that uses light to measure tissue oxygenation and brain activity—and ultrasound imaging. By using NIRS to study the brain activity associated with the sudden urge to urinate, Speich and his team are working to pinpoint the brain’s role and determine whether it or the bladder is the primary cause of an individual’s condition. “There are a lot of potential causes of overactive bladder,” says Speich. “Some people may have more than one cause. Individual responses to these treatments vary; what works well for one patient may not work at all for the next. We want to give doctors better tools for quantifying information about their patients so they can make better decisions and more optimized treatments.” Thanks to research grants, including a National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant from 2015-2025, Speich has been able to make a number of important findings in his bladder research. His team has closely examined the bladder’s dynamic elasticity, investigating the biomechanical mechanisms that allow the bladder muscle to fill and expand. Another recent focus asks, “Bladder or Brain. Which is it?” Speich and his team developed a tool called a sensation meter that they use to help determine what an individual is feeling as their bladder is filling over time. All this groundbreaking research and medical school collaboration, and to think—Speich nearly missed the opportunity to enter this field entirely. “When I tell students about how I came to be involved in bladder biomechanics, I tell them, you will always keep learning throughout your entire career,” says Speich. “You never know where you’re going to end up. If you’re an engineer, you’re a problem solver, and there are all kinds of problems in areas like business and medicine—beyond the traditional areas people think of when they think of mechanical engineering.”
