Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Delaware INBRE Summer Scholars Complete Biomedical Research Projects at ChristianaCare

Eight undergraduate scholars recently completed a 10-week immersion in biomedical research through the Delaware IDeA Network of Biomedical Research Excellence (INBRE) Summer Scholars Program at ChristianaCare. Their projects, spanning oncology, emergency medicine and community health, culminated in a capstone presentation and celebration on August 13 at Christiana Hospital. This year’s cohort included students from University of Delaware, Delaware State University and Delaware Technical Community College, as well as Delaware residents attending college out of state. Each student was paired with expert mentors from across ChristianaCare, contributing to research designed to improve patient care and outcomes. In addition to their primary projects, the scholars explored ChristianaCare’s advanced facilities such as the Gene Editing Institute Learning Lab, gaining hands-on exposure to cutting-edge methods in biomedical research. “This year’s DE-INBRE program at ChristianaCare was a one-of-a-kind experience,” said Susan Smith, Ph.D., RN, program director of Technology Research & Education at ChristianaCare and the INBRE site principal investigator. “We brought together undergraduates from various academic backgrounds and immersed them in real, hands-on biomedical research with some of our most accomplished investigators. “Watching these students go from a little unsure on day one to confidently presenting their own findings by the end of the summer was inspiring, and proof that programs like this are building the next generation of biomedical researchers in Delaware.” Delaware INBRE is a statewide initiative funded by the National Institutes of Health to strengthen Delaware’s biomedical research infrastructure. It supports undergraduate research training, faculty development and core facility investments across partner institutions. At ChristianaCare, the program offers students immersive, hands-on research experiences guided by seasoned investigators, equipping them with the skills, mentorship and exposure essential for careers in science and medicine. Madeline Rowland, a Delaware resident and rising senior at Williams College in Massachusetts, collaborated with Hank Chen, senior medical physicist at the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center & Research Institute, to evaluate tattoo-free, surface-guided radiation therapy for breast cancer patients. She also worked with leaders of ChristianaCare’s Center for Virtual Health to explore how different patient populations experience virtual primary care. Rowland praised the program for the research skills and knowledge she gained as well as the meaningful relationships she built with mentors, health care professionals and fellow scholars she might not have otherwise met. “Dr. Chen and the whole Radiation team really adopted me into the department,” Rowland said. “From sitting on the CT simulation table in my first week to working on my project, I felt fully welcomed. I’ve learned so much, and the people I’ve met made this summer unforgettable.” Chen was recognized as the program’s inaugural “Mentor of the Summer” for his exceptional dedication and thoughtful approach to teaching. Having now mentored INBRE scholars for three years, Chen has a personal connection to the program. His own daughter participated as an undergraduate and recently began her general surgery residency after graduating from Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia. For Chen, mentoring represents an investment in health care’s future. “The greatest asset of any institution is its talent,” he explained. “When you welcome students into your environment, you draw good people to your field, and patients ultimately benefit from that.” Naana Twusami, a rising senior at Delaware State University, spent her summer with the Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery and Hospital Dentistry Department. She examined social determinants of health in facial trauma patients, analyzing how factors like income, education, transportation and insurance status influence recovery. “Being here showed me that things like income or transportation can matter just as much as the medical care itself,” she said. “The INBRE Summer Scholars Program gave me a real look at how health care works, and how places like ChristianaCare are helping shape where it’s headed.” Amy Minsker, continuing medical education manager, Academic Affairs, served as manager of the summer scholars program. Read more on news.christianacare.org.

In an age of fast-moving misinformation, our expert teaches students how to spot what’s credible

As the new academic year begins, and at a time when misinformation often travels faster than facts, University of Rochester’s Kevin Meuwissen offers educators and young learners clarity and practical strategies for identifying credible sources. As an associate professor and chair of teaching and curriculum at the Warner School of Education and Human Development, Meuwissen focuses on how children and teens learn about politics and history — and how they can be taught to critically evaluate what they consume. “Young people pay close attention to who’s been consistently accurate,” he says. “They’re more likely to trust someone over time if their information holds up.” To empower students in our complex information environment, Meuwissen champions the so-called SIFT method — an easy-to-remember acronym and evidence-based toolkit that breaks down like this: • Stop! Pause before reacting or sharing • Investigate the source • Find better coverage • Trace claims back to their origin He also warns about how emotional framing, AI-generated visuals, deep fakes, and repeated exposure can distort judgment through the illusory truth effect — making misinformation feel believable even when it isn’t. His "Ever Wonder: How Can You Tell If A Source Is Credible?" video  is a handy teaching tool.  Meuwissen and his colleagues encourage teachers grappling with resistance over topics like climate science to consider not just evidence depth, but also students’ identities — political, cultural, and otherwise — when designing lessons. His approach emphasizes building trust, modeling thoughtful verification, and nurturing classroom norms rooted in accuracy — traits essential for forming discerning digital citizens. Kevin Meuwissen is available for interviews about identifying misinformation. He can be contacted through Warner School of Education Director of Communications Theresa Danylak at tdanylak@warner.rochester.edu.

MSU team develops scalable climate solutions for agricultural carbon markets

Why this matters: Builds trust in carbon markets. This science-based baseline system dramatically improves accuracy, helping ensure carbon credits are credible and truly reflect climate benefits. Enables real climate impact by accounting for both soil carbon and nitrous oxide emissions, the approach delivers a full, net climate assessment. Scales across millions of acres. Tested on 46 million hectares in 12 Midwest states, this approach is ready for large-scale adoption, helping farmers transition to regenerative practices with confidence and clarity. New research from Michigan State University, led by agricultural systems scientist Bruno Basso, addresses a major problem in agricultural carbon markets: how to set an accurate starting point, or “baseline,” for measuring climate benefits. Most current systems use fixed baselines that don’t account for the soil carbon changes and emissions that would occur if business-as-usual practices were maintained on fields. Such inaccuracies can distort carbon credit calculations and undermine market trust. “The choice of baseline can dramatically influence carbon credit generation; if the model is inaccurate, too many or too few credits may be issued, calling market legitimacy into question,” said Basso, a John A. Hannah Distinguished Professor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, the Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences and the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station at MSU. “Our dynamic baseline approach provides flexible scenarios that capture the comparative climate impacts of soil organic carbon, or SOC, sequestration and nitrous oxide emissions from business-as-usual practices and the new regenerative system.” The research, published in the journal Scientific Reports, covers 46 million hectares of cropland across the U.S. Midwest, provides carbon market stakeholders with a scalable, scientifically robust crediting framework. It offers both the investment-grade credibility and operational simplicity needed to expand regenerative agriculture. Regenerative agriculture and carbon markets Regenerative agriculture includes practices like cover cropping, reduced or no tillage, diversified rotations, adaptive grazing and agroforestry. These methods restore soil health, enhance biodiversity, increase system resilience and help mitigate climate change by building SOC and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon markets offer a promising financial mechanism to accelerate regenerative transitions. By compensating farmers for verified climate benefits, they can act as either offset markets (for external buyers) or inset markets (within agricultural supply chains). However, the integrity of these markets hinges on reliable, science-based measurement, reporting and verification systems that integrate modeling, field data and remote sensing. A breakthrough multi-model ensemble approach To overcome limitations in traditional modeling, the MSU scientists and colleagues from different institutions in the U.S. and Europe deployed a multi-model ensemble, or MME, framework, using eight validated crop and biogeochemical models across 40,000 locations in 934 counties spanning 12 Midwestern states. The MME avoids model selection bias, lowering uncertainty in soil carbon predictions from 99% (with single models) to just 36% (with the MME). “This is a game changer for carbon markets,” said Basso. “It delivers a level of accuracy and scalability — from individual fields to entire regions — that current systems lack.” The MME platform also enables the creation of precalculated, practice-based dynamic baselines, reducing the burden of data collection and easing participation for producers. Improved mitigation assessments Unlike many approaches that consider only SOC, the MSU lead team’s study evaluates both SOC sequestration and nitrous oxide emissions to determine net climate impact. “This comprehensive assessment ensures that carbon credits represent true climate mitigation,” said Tommaso Tadiello, postdoctoral fellow in MSU’s Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences and co-author of the study. “A practice that increases soil carbon may improve soil health,” added Basso, “but it may not deliver actual climate benefits if it simultaneously increases nitrous oxide emissions. Our method provides a full accounting of the net climate effect.” The research team found that the combination of no-till and cover cropping delivered an average net mitigation of 1.2 metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent per hectare annually, potentially abating 16.4 teragrams of carbon dioxide-equivalent across the study area. This research was supported by the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, U.S. Department of Energy’s Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, National Science Foundation Long-Term Ecological Research, Builders Initiative, The Soil Inventory Project, Generation IM Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, Morgan Stanley Sustainable Solutions Collaborative and MSU AgBioResearch.

Tariffs fuel global sourcing shakeup for fashion in the U.S.

Be prepared to see more Made in Vietnam or Made in Bangladesh labels on clothing in the coming years. That’s because U.S. fashion companies are rethinking their global sourcing strategies and operations in response to the Trump administration’s trade policies and tariffs, according to new research by the University of Delaware's Sheng Lu. Lu, professor and graduate director in the Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies, partners with the United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA), on an annual survey of executives at the top 25 U.S. fashion brands, retailers, importers and wholesalers doing business globally. Members include well-known names like Levi’s, Macy’s, Ralph Lauren and Under Armour, among others. The report covers business challenges and outlook, sourcing practices and views on trade policy. “We wear more than just clothes; we wear the global economy, the supply chain and the public policies that jointly make fashion and affordable clothing available to American families,” Lu said. “We want to know where these companies source their products and what factors matter to them the most. It’s a classic question and it evolves each year.” This year’s report, released on July 31, shows tariffs and protectionist policies are the top business challenge for companies, with nearly half reporting declining sales and more than 20% saying they have had to lay off employees. This was followed closely by uncertainty around inflation and the economy, increasing sourcing and production costs, and changes in trade policies from other countries. In response, more than 80% of companies said they will diversify the countries from which they source their products, focusing on vendors in Asian countries such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia and Indonesia. Despite the push for “Made in USA” garments, only 17% of respondents plan to increase sourcing from the U.S. Lu shared his findings in the following Q&A: What surprised you about the survey results? Two things surprised me. First, contrary to common perception, the results do not indicate that the tariff policy so far has effectively supported or encouraged more textile and apparel production in the U.S. This actually makes sense. U.S. mills are as uncertain about the tariff rates as our trading partners are. A U.S. company may manufacture the clothes here, but use yarns, fabrics and zippers from other countries. When tariffs drive up the cost of these raw materials, it reduces the price competitiveness of apparel “Made in the USA.” Many domestic factories are in a “wait and see” mode, holding back on making critical investments to expand production due to the lack of a clear policy signal. Second, I was struck by the wide-ranging impact of the tariffs, which has gone far beyond what I originally imagined. Tariffs have not only increased U.S. fashion companies’ sourcing costs but have also affected their product development, shipping and overall supply chain management. Nearly 70% of the survey respondents said they have delayed or canceled some sourcing orders due to tariff hikes. Should consumers be prepared for less variety in clothing or shortages? Later this year, we may see fewer clothing items from our favorite brands on store shelves — especially during the holiday shopping season — and many of those items may come with a higher price tag. That said, fashion companies are doing what they can to avoid passing on tariff costs across the board, as they recognize that consumers are price sensitive. Many surveyed U.S. fashion companies say they intend to strengthen relationships with key vendors as a strategic move, and there is a growing public call for U.S. companies to provide more support and resources to their suppliers in developing countries. Sustainability is a huge issue in the fashion industry, as millions of tons of textiles end up in landfills every year. Companies say they are spending less on sustainability efforts. What would you tell companies about their sustainability efforts? Our survey suggests that sustainability can open up new business opportunities for U.S. fashion companies. Respondents said that when sourcing clothing made from sustainable fibers — like recycled, organic, biodegradable and regenerative materials — they are more likely to rely on a U.S. sourcing base or suppliers in the Western Hemisphere. In other words, even if apparel “Made in the USA” or nearby cannot always compete on price with lower-cost Asian suppliers, there is a better chance to compete on sustainability. Based on what I’ve learned from our Gen Z students — who expect better quality and more sustainable products if they have to pay more, and are critical consumers for many brands and retailers — it is unwise to hold back on investments in sustainability. What do you see as the biggest takeaway from the survey? One key takeaway is that the $4 trillion fashion and apparel business today is truly “made anywhere in the world and sold anywhere in the world.” In such a highly global and interconnected industry, everyone is a stakeholder — meaning there are no real winners in a tariff war. The study is also a powerful reminder that fashion is far more than just creating stylish clothing. Today’s fashion industry is deeply intertwined with sustainability, international relations, trade policy and technology. I hope the findings will be timely, informative and useful to fashion companies, policymakers, suppliers and fellow researchers. I plan to incorporate the insights, as well as the valuable industry connections developed through my long term partnership with USFIA, in my classroom, giving UD students fresh, real-world perspectives on the often “unfashionable” but essential side of the industry. Reporters interested in speaking with Lu can contact him directly by visiting his profile and clicking on the contact button. UD's media relations team can be reached via email.

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering professor Nibir Dhar, Ph.D., elevated to Virginia Microelectronics Center endowed chair

Nibir Dhar, Ph.D., director of the Convergence Lab Initiative and professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, was recently appointed to the Virginia Microelectronics Center endowed chair. This position gives Dhar the opportunity to shape future scientists and engineers, as well as pursue breakthrough research at the College of Engineering. “It’s more than an academic role,” said Dhar. “It’s about preparing students for complex problems they’ll solve in industry and defense.” Dhar teaches semiconductor and infrared device courses while researching next-generation materials for real-world applications. He also explores AI’s ability to improve human-machine interactions. With his accomplished background and experience at national defense labs, Dhar bridges classroom theory with practical engineering challenges his students will face in their careers. “It feels incredible to be recognized this way. Virginia Commonwealth University truly values faculty who pour themselves into student success and university growth. What really drives me is knowing I’m helping build the next generation of problem-solvers. That’s where the real satisfaction comes from.” said Dhar. This promotion encourages Dhar to make bigger strides for research development that will transform both teaching methods and how technology advances in military and commercial sectors.

Vitamin D in pregnancy may boost kids’ brainpower

You don't need a scientist to tell you that milk is good for babies. But a new study led by the University of Delaware's Melissa Melough sheds light on the power of prenatal nutrition — specifically vitamin D— as a key contributor to children’s brain development. The research found that children whose mothers had higher vitamin D levels during pregnancy scored better on tests of memory, attention and problem-solving skills at ages 7 to 12 compared with those whose mothers had lower levels. Melough wrote about the study in a piece for The Conversation. Vitamin D deficiency affects 42% of U.S. adults and about a third of pregnant women, but the average American woman consumes just 168 international units of vitamin D daily (the recommended amount is 600 ID). Many prenatal vitamins contain only 400 IU. One promising finding could result in the solution of a racial disparity in nutrition. The study found a link between prenatal vitamin D levels and childhood cognition was strongest among Black families, who also face higher rates of vitamin D deficiency. Therefore, vitamin D supplementation could be a low-cost strategy to support brain development while reducing racial disparities. Melough is available for interviews about the study, and can also speak to the following topics: • Nutritional and environmental factors influencing human health. • Populations at risk for nutritional inadequacies or harmful environmental exposures. • The roles of endocrine disruptors in the development of obesity. • The influences of maternal nutrition on childhood outcomes • Novel dietary approaches to reduce chemical exposures or their associated health consequences. To arrange an interview with Melough, visit her profile page and click on the "contact" button, or send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

Poll finds bipartisan agreement on a key issue: Regulating AI

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.  Read the original article here. In the run-up to the vote in the U.S. Senate on President Donald Trump’s spending and tax bill, Republicans scrambled to revise the bill to win support of wavering GOP senators. A provision included in the original bill was a 10-year moratorium on any state law that sought to regulate artificial intelligence. The provision denied access to US$500 million in federal funding for broadband internet and AI infrastructure projects for any state that passed any such law. The inclusion of the AI regulation moratorium was widely viewed as a win for AI firms that had expressed fears that states passing regulations on AI would hamper the development of the technology. However, many federal and state officials from both parties, including state attorneys general, state legislators and 17 Republican governors, publicly opposed the measure. In the last hours before the passage of the bill, the Senate struck down the provision by a resounding 99-1 vote. In an era defined by partisan divides on issues such as immigration, health care, social welfare, gender equality, race relations and gun control, why are so many Republican and Democratic political leaders on the same page on the issue of AI regulation? Whatever motivated lawmakers to permit AI regulation, our recent poll shows that they are aligned with the majority of Americans who view AI with trepidation, skepticism and fear, and who want the emerging technology regulated. Bipartisan sentiments We are political scientists who use polls to study partisan polarization in the United States, as well as the areas of agreement that bridge the divide that has come to define U.S. politics. In April 2025, we fielded a nationally representative poll that sought to capture what Americans think about AI, including what they think AI will mean for the economy and society going forward. The public is generally pessimistic. We found that 65% of Americans said they believe AI will increase the spread of false information. Fifty-six percent of Americans worry AI will threaten the future of humanity. Fewer than 3 in 10 Americans told us AI will make them more productive (29%), make people less lonely (21%) or improve the economy (22%). While Americans tend to be deeply divided along partisan lines on most issues, the apprehension regarding AI’s impact on the future appears to be relatively consistent across Republicans and Democrats. For example, only 19% of Republicans and 22% of Democrats said they believe that artificial intelligence will make people less lonely. Respondents across the parties are in lockstep when it comes to their views on whether AI will make them personally more productive, with only 29% − both Republicans and Democrats − agreeing. And 60% of Democrats and 53% Republicans said they believe AI will threaten the future of humanity. On the question of whether artificial intelligence should be strictly regulated by the government, we found that close to 6 in 10 Americans (58%) agree with this sentiment. Given the partisan differences in support for governmental regulation of business, we expected to find evidence of a partisan divide on this question. However, our data finds that Democrats and Republicans are of one mind on AI regulation, with majorities of both Democrats (66%) and Republicans (54%) supporting strict AI regulation. When we take into account demographic and political characteristics such as race, educational attainment, gender identity, income, ideology and age, we again find that partisan identity has no significant impact on opinion regarding the regulation of AI. State of anxiety In the years ahead, the debate over AI and the government’s role in regulating it is likely to intensify, on both the state and federal levels. As each day seems to bring new advances in AI’s capability and reach, the future is shaping up to be one in which human beings coexist – and hopefully flourish – alongside AI. This new reality has made the American public, both Democrats and Republicans, justifiably nervous, and our polling captures this widespread trepidation. Lawmakers and technology leaders alike could address this anxiety by better communicating the pitfalls and potential of AI, and take seriously the concerns of the public. After all, the public is not alone in its trepidation. Many experts in the field also have substantial worries about the future of AI. One of the fundamental political questions moving forward, then, will be to what degree regulators put guardrails on this emerging and transformative technology in order to protect Americans from AI’s negative consequences. Adam Eichen is a doctoral candidate in political science at UMass Amherst. Alexander Theodoridis is associate professor of political science and co-director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst. Sara M. Kirshbaum is a postdoctoral fellow and lecturer of political science at UMass Amherst. Tatishe Nteta is provost professor of political science and director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst.

Taming "The Bear": Villanova Professor Examines Workplace Toxicity in FX's Acclaimed Series

In the latest season of FX’s award-winning series “The Bear,” lead character and chef Carmen “Carmy” Berzatto finds himself at a crossroads. A culinary genius, Carmy has successfully overseen the reinvention of his family’s Italian beef shop as a high-end restaurant—shepherding a dedicated, if unpolished, crew of sandwich makers into a world of haute cuisine, fine wine and elevated service. However, over the course of this transition, his exacting standards have contributed to a culture of anxiety, dysfunction and resentment in the workplace. Despite staff members’ professional and personal growth, tempers still flare like burners on a range, with Carmy’s obsessive attention to detail and single-minded pursuit of perfection spurring conflict. By season’s end, grappling with the fallout from a mixed review seemingly influenced by the back-of-house “chaos,” the chef is forced to confront a complicated and thorny question: Am I getting in the way of my own restaurant’s success? Carmy’s dilemma, while fictional, reflects the very real challenges many modern businesses face when excellence is prioritized at the expense of psychological safety and workplace harmony. Per Manuela Priesemuth, PhD, who researches toxic work climates, aggression on the job and organizational fairness, the warning signs are all too frequently overlooked in high-pressure environments like restaurants. “Some high-stakes industries have a characteristic of having toxic behavior more accepted,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “When it’s more accepted or normed, it’s a real problem.” As she explains, workers in the food service industry, much like medical professionals in an operating room or military personnel in a combat zone, have a tendency to view measured communication and thoughtful interaction as a luxury or even, in some cases, a hindrance. Essentially, there’s a common misconception that working with an edge—yelling orders, avoiding dialogue and berating “underperformers”—gets the job done. “In all of these high-stakes environments where it’s thought there’s leeway to talk negatively or disparagingly, people are mistaken in the productivity result,” Dr. Priesemuth says. “It actually changes for the better in positive climates, because people who are treated with dignity and respect are better performers than those who are mistreated.” To Dr. Priesemuth’s point, research increasingly shows that workplace culture, not just talent or technical ability, is an essential driver of organizational success. In an environment like Carmy’s kitchen, where pride and passion often give way to personal attacks and shouting matches, the on-the-job dynamic can effectively undermine productivity. What may begin as an intended push for excellence can instead result in burnout, high turnover and weakened trust—outcomes that are especially problematic in collaborative, fast-paced industries like hospitality. “There’s even evidence that abusive behavior in restaurant settings can lead to food loss,” shares Dr. Priesemuth. “So, there is a sort of retaliation from the employees who are going through this experience, whether it’s measured [in profit margins] or impact on the customer.” In order to prevent these less-than-ideal outcomes, businesses should take steps proactively, says Dr. Priesemuth. More specifically, they should clearly articulate their values and expectations, considerately engage with their staff’s opinions and concerns and consistently invest in their employees’ growth and development. In the world of “The Bear,” a few of Carmy’s managerial decisions in the second season could be seen as moves in the right direction. At that juncture, he was leveraging his industry connections to provide his restaurant’s staff with the tools and training necessary to thrive in Chicago’s fine dining scene, building skills, confidence and goodwill. “If you give people voice—such as input on the menu, for example, or more autonomy in completing a certain task—it boosts morale,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “It helps people feel that they have input and that they are valued members of the team; it’s this sort of collaborative, positive relationship that increases commitment and performance.” Establishing this type of work culture, grounded in open communication, mutual respect and a shared sense of mission, takes concerted effort and constant maintenance. In situations in which toxicity has already become an issue, as it has in Carmy’s kitchen, the task becomes decidedly more difficult. Typically, it demands a long-term commitment to organizational change at the business’ highest levels. “Adjusting the tone at the top really matters,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “So, if the owner were to treat their chefs and waiters with the dignity and respect that they deserve as workers, that also trickles down to, for example, the customer.” A leader’s influence on workplace morale, she contends, is nuanced and far-reaching. When those in charge model a lack of empathy or emotional distance, for instance, a sort of toxicity can take root. Likewise, when they repeatedly show anger, animosity or frustration, those same feelings and attitudes can have an ingrained effect—regardless of a staff’s talent or ability. Given the outsized role owners, supervisors and managers play in shaping organizational culture, Dr. Priesemuth further notes, “Leaders must also feel that they’re being supported. You can’t have someone who’s exhausted, works 80 hours a week and has relationship and money issues and expect them to say, ‘What are your problems? What do you need?’” In many ways, her insights speak directly to the struggles Carmy faces and prompts throughout “The Bear’s” run. At every turn, he’s dogged by family and relationship troubles, mounting financial pressures and unresolved trauma from a past role. Ultimately, as would happen in real life, his difficulty in healthily processing and addressing these issues doesn’t just harm him; it affects his staff, manifesting itself as a need for control and a crusade for perfection. “There are spillover effects from your own personal life into your job role. In the management field, that has become increasingly clear,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “Whatever you’re going through, whether it’s from an old job or something personal, it will automatically spill over into your current work life and your interactions. And, vice versa, what’s happening to you at work will [impact you off the clock].” In dramatic fashion, the fourth season of “The Bear” concludes with Carmy acknowledging as much. Determining that there are other aspects of his life desperately in need of attention, he surrenders the reins of his business to chef de cuisine Sydney “Syd” Adamu and maître d’hôtel Richard “Richie” Jerimovich, appointing them part-owners. While the soundness of this decision remains a subject for the show’s next season, Carmy justifies the move with a blunt admission: “It’s the best thing for the restaurant. We have to put the restaurant first… I don’t have anything to pull from.” In the end, in both “The Bear” and management studies, there’s an understanding that building healthy and productive work environments requires active engagement and positive reinforcement on the part of leadership. In a sense, creating a strong work culture is shown to be a lot like preparing a phenomenal meal; it’s a matter of attentiveness, patience and care. Without those ingredients, the result could very well be a recipe for disaster.

Artificial Intelligence Makes Energy Demand More Complex — And More Achievable

In a 2024 paper, researchers from Carnegie Mellon University and machine learning development corporation Hugging Face found that generative AI systems could use as much as 33 times more energy to complete a task than task-specific software would. “The climate and sustainability challenge can be overwhelming in the amount of new clean technology that we have to deploy and develop, and the ways that the energy system has to evolve,” said Costa Samaras, head of the university-wide Wilton E. Scott Institute for Energy Innovation. “The scale of the challenge alone can be overwhelming to folks.” However, Carnegie Mellon University’s standing commitment to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals and its position as a nationally recognized leader in technologies like artificial intelligence mean that it is uniquely positioned to address growing concerns around energy demand, climate resilience and social good.

DARPA awards VCU $4.875 million for development of modular drug manufacturing platform

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is funding a $13M grant for a Rutgers University and Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) partnership through the EQUIP-A-Pharma program, with $4.175 million to James Ferri, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Chemical and Life Science Engineering at VCU, to develop a modular manufacturing platform for sterile liquid drug products. The 24-month grant supports Ferri’s project, “Modular Manufacturing of Sterile Liquid Drug Products,” which develops a continuous manufacturing platform capable of producing highly potent drug substances such as albuterol sulfate and bupivacaine hydrochloride. These drug substances are for use in sterile liquid products, where compliance with purity of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) and impurity profiles are characterized and controlled in real time throughout the manufacturing process. “This work enables agile continuous manufacturing of drug substance and end-to-end drug product manufacturing of several highly potent drug substances with real time quality control,” Ferri said. “The combination of dynamic modular operation and real-time quality control will increase the supply of critical medicines in the United States.” Drug shortages continue to receive national attention, with albuterol sulfate and bupivacaine hydrochloride both appearing on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration drug shortage list within the past year. The project develops technologies that enable distributed manufacturing approaches to essential medicines currently in shortage in the United States. The platform incorporates several innovative features including continuous flow synthesis for improved process performance, online spectroscopy for real-time quality control, and modular unit operations that can be rapidly configured for different drug products. Key technologies include heterogeneous catalytic flow reactors, in-line purification systems and advanced process analytical technologies. The continuous manufacturing approach offers significant advantages over traditional batch manufacturing, including improved process control, reduced waste and the ability to produce medicines closer to the point of care. The modular design enables rapid deployment and flexible manufacturing of multiple drug products using the same platform. Ferri is collaborating with researchers from Rutgers University on the project, which began in August 2024. The platform is designed to fit within a standard shipping container, enabling distributed manufacturing capabilities. The research directly addresses national security concerns about pharmaceutical supply chain vulnerabilities while advancing the field of continuous pharmaceutical manufacturing. Students involved in the project gain experience in cutting-edge manufacturing technologies that are increasingly important in addressing global health challenges.