Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Georgia Southern researchers survey flood-stricken area of Bangladesh
Cox’s Bazar is a bustling tourist destination located on the southeastern coast of Bangladesh. It’s home to more than 3 million people living along the longest naturally occurring sea beach in the world, extending into the Bay of Bengal. But during the monsoon season, the area is prone to flooding and frequent landslides due to its geographical location and low altitude. More than 7,000 people living in the region were displaced in 2024 after a particularly severe season that destroyed thousands of shelters, leaving three dead. Georgia Southern University Assistant Professor Munshi Rahman, Ph.D., knows the dangers and devastation monsoon season can bring to this area. As a native of Bangladesh, he has witnessed firsthand how environmental changes, urbanization and deforestation contribute to the devastation. This is why he is actively working to help his home country identify the most disaster-prone areas through the use of geographic information systems and surveys. In January, Rahman and junior geoscience major Emma Robinson traveled to Cox’s Bazar to survey and identify the areas most prone to landslides and flooding with a goal of providing data to local government and nongovernmental organizations that could help address disaster risks. Robinson says she was thrilled to gain experience in field research and engage in work she’s passionate about. “Dr. Rahman’s project really inspired me because I’ve always had a drive to help the environment,” she said. “I thought this would be a great first step into research, especially since geology and geography are so closely related.” The two used geographic information systems, GPS and community input to pinpoint vulnerable spots near residential areas and population centers. Specifically, they found that many homes and refugee camps were built on slopes. Aside from being geographically vulnerable, they observed that many of these dwellings, built from bamboo poles, tarps, and corrugated metal, lacked the infrastructure to withstand flooding. “The key findings reveal a serious environmental degradation on local landscapes exacerbating the frequency and severity of landslides and flooding events in the region,” Rahman said. He added that these insights highlight the urgency for sustainable ecosystem management and the adoption of inclusive disaster management to reduce social and environmental vulnerabilities Rahman and Robinson suggest that their findings, combined with additional socioeconomic research, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the situation on the ground. This would enhance disaster preparedness while promoting sustainable land use. “Not too many undergrads have opportunities like this,” she said. “I know this will help me get a jump-start on my senior thesis and give me a whole new perspective for future research projects. It’s made me more confident overall as a student and researcher.” Rahman is similarly grateful for the opportunity to give his students experience in the field. “As a professor, I’ve always wanted to give my students as much real-world experience as possible,” he said. “I also give Emma full credit. Prior to this trip, she had never traveled outside the U.S. She showed incredible courage and a real talent for research.”
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.
Power Shift: How CMU Is Leading America’s Energy Evolution
Carnegie Mellon University, long known for its prowess in computer science and engineering, is now emerging as a key innovator within America’s energy landscape. As AI models grow more powerful, so too does their appetite for energy, straining an aging and outdated grid and prompting urgent questions about infrastructure, security and access. From reimagining AI data centers to modernizing and securing the electric grid, CMU researchers are working on practical solutions to pressing challenges in how the U.S. produces, moves and secures energy. Learn what CMU experts have to say about their Work That Matters.
CMU Experts at the Intersection of Energy and Innovation
Carnegie Mellon University experts are developing practical solutions for a fast-changing energy system. Their work modernizes infrastructure, accelerates innovation and harnesses AI for a more efficient and resilient future at a moment when the stakes for national competitiveness and public well-being have never been higher. Learn what CMU experts have to say about their Work That Matters.
The Canadian Housing Market is a Mess
The Social Contract is Broken—And We Forgot to Tell Our Kids There was a time in Canada when the rules seemed straightforward: work hard, stick to the plan, and your kids would have an even better future than you did. That was the unspoken social contract—not legally binding, but deeply believed. A handshake between generations, sealed with maple syrup and mutual optimism. You purchased a modest home, stayed with one employer for 30 years, and retired with a gold watch, a pension, and a house you owned outright. Life wasn’t flashy, but it was fair. And your kids? They would climb even higher. Well… about that! The Housing Market: From Stepping Stone to Stumbling Block Homeownership used to be a rite of passage. Now it feels more like winning The Amazing Race: Toronto Edition. According to Statistics Canada housing data, in 1990, the average Canadian home sold for approximately $215,000. Fast-forward to late 2023–early 2024, and that number has ballooned to around $670,000–$700,000 on average —a more than 200–225% increase in just over three decades. Meanwhile, wages didn’t get the memo. Since 1990, they’ve only doubled. So, while home prices soared, incomes shifted to the kitchen for more instant noodles. It's not just a gap—it’s a canyon. Sure, there was a housing correction in the early ’90s. But if you’re under 40, you’ve never seen a price drop—only stable prices (on a good day). Meanwhile, boomers and older Gen Xers bought homes when down payments didn’t require a GoFundMe page. Boomers Rode the Rocket—Then Pulled Up the Ladder Let’s be honest: we did quite well. If you purchased property in the ’70s, ’80s, or ’90s, you benefited from a wave of equity that transformed retirement into a cruise ship brochure. For many, the house became the largest—and only—source of real wealth. We got used to it. Then we got protective. Then... well, a bit smug. • NIMBYism? Guilty. • Zoning restrictions? Voted yes. • Capital gains reform? Over my arthritic body. • Preferred Pronouns – Me, Myself and I We feared anything that could lower our property values. A 25% correction? Not in my golden years! But that might be what it takes to give our kids a fair shot. We told them to "work hard," then quietly reinforced a game they couldn’t win. We Told Them to Hustle—Then Rigged the Game Today’s young Canadians aren’t lazy; they’re exhausted. They’ve done everything we asked—degrees, careers, even side hustles—and still can’t afford a 500-square-foot shoebox in Toronto without cashing in their RRSPs or moving back into our basements. By the way, they’re doing this—not because they missed us, but because rent is eating up half their paycheque and still asking for dessert. Even worse? Many are looking abroad, not for a gap year, but for an economy in which they can participate—one where they might be able to afford a home and groceries in the same month. If the best and brightest are quietly packing their bags, it’s not wanderlust; it’s a policy failure. There’s now a whole ecosystem catalyzed by everything from consultants to cloud-based software and payment platforms that has aided a global movement of “creative-class” digital nomads. For those who want a more affordable cost of living and have the skills necessary to work remotely, this generation has options to move. In "Intelligent Money," author Chris Skinner envisions a future where AI-powered financial systems won’t just advise against homeownership—they’ll actively discourage it. Why commit to mortgage debt when you can rent flexibly, invest digitally, and maintain liquidity in your life? Not a dream, but a necessity. We told them to pull up their socks. They’re wondering if we sold their shoes. What Happened to Profit Sharing? Remember when companies used to share their success? Microsoft, Google, and yes, still Costco, offered profit-sharing or stock options that turned employees into unexpected millionaires. It wasn’t charity; it was a fair deal. Then gig work emerged, HR departments disappeared, and the only thing we shared was burnout. We need to restore fairness—perhaps even incentivize companies that value loyalty. Renter Equity Accounts: A Radical Concept—Equity You're not building wealth if rent is more than 30% of your income. You’re funding someone else’s retirement. So, here’s a thought: when rent exceeds 30%, why don’t we match the excess—25% to 50%—and deposit it into a locked “Renter Equity Account”? It grows tax-free and can be used for: • A down payment • Retirement savings • Student debt relief • Emergency funds Employers could contribute to REA plans. Governments could provide incentives, and renters could finally receive more than just a rent receipt and a pat on the back. It's Time for Bold, Practical Ideas We can’t rewind to 1990. (Although the fashion world is trying.) But we can fix what’s broken: Let Canadians earn their first $250,000 tax-free, provided it is used for a down payment or to eliminate student loans. That’s helping reduce overall debt. Ensure zoning reform is effective by linking federal infrastructure funding to genuine housing development. Establish public wealth tools - TFSA-style accounts for low-wealth, high-effort Canadians. Forgive student loans for public service, specifically for individuals filling positions such as nurses, teachers, early childhood educators, and tradespeople, with added incentives for those relocating to underserved areas. Invest in them, and they will reinvest in us. What Families Can Do—Right Now No, you can’t rewrite national policy from the kitchen table. (Unless you’re Chrystia Freeland.) But here’s what you can do: Start a down payment fund—consider using a TFSA or an investment account to help your kids build capital. Create an ADU—laneway homes, granny suites, legal basement rentals. Housing and support combined. Access your home equity—HELOCs or reverse mortgages can be lifelines, not luxury options. Create a rent-to-own family plan—turn monthly rent into future equity. Discuss finances—share your successes, warn against mistakes, and share the financial knowledge you’ve gained from hard lessons. An Apology—from the Heart To our kids and to the next generation, we should say we’re sorry. We didn’t plan for this outcome. We assumed the paths we walked would still be open for you, that the same rules would still apply, and that equity would be available to all. We forgot that a contract—even an unspoken one—still needs to be honoured. But it’s not too late. We can speak out. We can share our thoughts. We can change the policies, shift the mindsets, and reopen the doors that have been closed, because the future of this country shouldn’t be something you have to leave to find. Let’s fix this. So, you can stay. And thrive. And lead. Let’s rebuild the contract together. Deal? Don’t Retire … Re-Wire! Sue
AU research team awarded $4.4 million American Heart Association grant
A research team at Augusta University, led by Jennifer C. Sullivan, PhD, has secured a $4.4 million grant from the American Heart Association to study the risk factors for cardiovascular and kidney diseases and how they impact women. Sullivan’s research center, “Disruptions in cardiorenal free fatty acid metabolism in Cardiovascular Kidney Metabolic Syndrome,” is part of a larger $15 million project titled “Strategically Focused Research Network on Cardiovascular Kidney Metabolic Syndrome: Heterogeneity in Women.” The overarching AHA project is aimed at learning why women may be more likely to develop cardiovascular and kidney diseases due to certain unique risk factors and life stages. Research teams from Massachusetts General Hospital and The Ohio State University were also chosen. “I think this is a huge step for Augusta University as we continue to distinguish ourselves and the research that we have here focused on the health of women,” said Sullivan, dean of The Graduate School. “This grant is particularly impactful as we look to advance and improve the health of women, not just in Georgia, but for the entire country.” According to the Healthy Georgia Report, produced by AU’s School of Public Health, Georgia has the 23rd highest rate of obesity in the United States. Among the women living in the state, 38.3% of them, as well as 37.5% of people living in rural areas, suffer from obesity. “It’s great that we are able to represent the state of Georgia because our state has such a high prevalence for obesity rates,” said Sullivan, who is the director of AU’s SCORE project “Improving awareness of women with hypertension: ROAR (Rural, Obese, At Risk).” “It’s important for us to understand that different populations have distinct needs. You can’t talk about a one-size-fits-all approach to health. This is really about trying to understand how different groups are impacted.” Each center is comprised of three teams, as well as a training component and an area partner. Together, they will explore obesity’s lifetime impact on CKM syndrome through three projects. CKM syndrome is a clinical term that describes the combined health effects of heart disease, kidney disease, diabetes and obesity, which puts people at high risk for heart attack, stroke and heart failure. According to the American Heart Association’s 2025 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics, about 1 in 3 U.S. adults has at least three components of CKM syndrome, which include high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol, high blood glucose (sugar), impaired kidney function and excess body weight. The first project is led by Daria Ilatovskaya, PhD, and Justine Abais-Battad, PhD, and will look at aging and Western diet-induced CKMS mechanisms in obesity. Ilatovskaya is an associate professor and the graduate program director for the Doctor of Philosophy in Physiology program, and Abais-Battad is an assistant professor in the Department of Physiology with the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University. The second component, led by Jessica Faulkner, PhD, an assistant professor in MCG’s Physiology department, will study obesity-associated mechanisms of CKMS in pregnancy. The third project, led by Stephen Coughlin, PhD, with Marlo Vernon, PhD, is looking at CKMS epidemiology, associations with obesity, CVD/CKD. Coughlin is the program director for the Master of Science in Epidemiology and professor of epidemiology in the School of Public Health’s Department of Biostatistics, Data Science, and Epidemiology, while Vernon is an associate professor with MCG’s Georgia Prevention Institute and SPH’s Department of Community and Behavioral Health Sciences. Additionally, the team will talk to women and health care providers from a variety of backgrounds and experiences to assess current knowledge and interest levels in heart health and use that information to develop programs that may help treat and prevent disease. There is also a training director, Alison Kriegel, PhD, a professor in the Department of Physiology, and a core director, Guido Verbeck, PhD, chair and professor of the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry in the College of Science and Mathematics. “We have a strong blend of clinical epidemiology and basic science, as well as a training component, which we will fill with post-doctoral fellows,” Sullivan said. “Dr. Ilatovskaya, Dr. Faulkner, Dr. Abais-Battad and Dr. Vernon are all a part of our ROAR grant, and, while this isn’t directly related to that program, it allowed us to demonstrate how we are already well positioned to work together to amplify our ability and increase awareness about the importance of the health of women.” The team has over 50 collaborative papers and has secured more than $13 million in collaborative funding to advance the health of women. They also all have experience training fellows and students to continue to expand their reach. “We already have a lot of the infrastructure in place for this kind of cross-disciplinary project, so we leaned very heavily into our connections and the expertise we have here at Augusta University. It’s set up very similar to our ROAR program, so this is something that was really organic in nature,” Sullivan said. The American Heart Association has invested almost $300 million to establish 18 Strategically Focused Research Networks, each aimed at addressing a key strategic issue identified by the association’s volunteer Board of Directors. Prior networks have been studying a wide variety of important topics including, but not limited to, prevention, hypertension, the health of women, heart failure, obesity, vascular disease, atrial fibrillation, arrhythmias/sudden cardiac death, cardiometabolic health/type 2 diabetes, health technology, cardio-oncology, the biological impact of chronic psychosocial stress and the role of inflammation in cardiovascular health. Each network centers around scientific knowledge and knowledge gaps, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of the key research topic. Three to six research centers make up each network, bringing together investigators with expertise in basic, clinical and population/behavioral health science to find new ways to diagnose, treat and prevent heart disease and stroke. Funding scientific research and discovery through initiatives like these awards is a cornerstone of the century-old American Heart Association’s lifesaving mission. The association has now funded more than $5.9 billion in cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and brain health research since 1949, making it the single largest non-government supporter of heart and brain health research in the United States. New knowledge resulting from this funding continues to save lives and directly impact millions of people in every corner of the U.S. and around the world. Looking to know more about the amazing research happening at Augusta? To connect with Dr. Sullivan, simply click on her icon to arrange an interview today.
A path to fair minerals trade: Researcher champions global trust model
As the world races to build cleaner energy systems and powerful AI technologies, the demand for critical minerals—like lithium, cobalt, and rare earths—is soaring. But with this demand comes rising global tension over who controls these resources. University of Delaware Professor Saleem Ali, an international expert in environmental policy and chair of UD's Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, is suggesting a new way forward. In a new article published in Science, along with a United Nations policy brief, Ali and his coauthors propose the creation of a Global Minerals Trust. The article notes how the international plan would help countries work together to manage and share critical minerals fairly and sustainably—avoiding political fights, price shocks and environmental damage. “Without a shared framework, we risk deepening global inequalities, triggering unnecessary resource conflicts and undermining our ability to deliver on climate goals,” says Ali, who also leads the Critical Minerals and Inclusive Energy Transition program at the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health. The proposed Trust would use independent checks—similar to those used in nuclear safety—to make sure countries are meeting environmental and social standards. Each nation would keep control of its own resources but agree to prioritize sales of those minerals at market prices so that they can be used for clean energy infrastructure. The article builds on a TED Talk that Ali gave last year as part of the Rockefeller Foundation's "Big Bets" initiative. Ali is available for interviews on the topic and can be reached by clicking on his profile.
ExpertSpotlight: American Steel Tariffs – A Brief History
The history of steel trade and tariffs in the United States is deeply intertwined with the nation’s industrial rise, global economic strategy, and political maneuvering. From the late 19th century through the 21st, steel has symbolized both national strength and international tension. Trade protections—such as tariffs—have been used to shield American steel producers from foreign competition, often sparking international disputes and shaping the direction of U.S. economic policy. This topic matters to the public because it affects manufacturing jobs, infrastructure costs, international relations, and the price of goods in everyday life. Understanding steel tariffs offers a lens into larger debates about globalization, economic nationalism, and trade fairness. Key story angles that may interest a broad audience include: The origins of U.S. steel tariffs: Tracing the first protective tariffs in the late 1800s and their role in America’s industrial expansion. The role of steel in national security and economic independence: Investigating why steel has been labeled a “strategic industry” across administrations. Tariff flashpoints: Highlighting major tariff battles—such as the 2002 and 2018 steel tariffs—and their economic and diplomatic consequences. Impact on American manufacturing and jobs: Examining whether tariffs have protected or hindered employment in steel-producing regions. Global trade tensions: Exploring how tariffs have affected relationships with allies such as Canada, the EU, and China. Future of steel trade policy: Discussing evolving views on protectionism, globalization, and climate-linked trade strategies. Connect with our experts about the history of tariffs and steel in America: Check out our experts here : www.expertfile.com
ChristianaCare Charts New Course With Nurse Robotics Research Fellowship
ChristianaCare, the first hospital system in the region to deploy collaborative robots, has once again broken new ground, this time with a nationally unique initiative that puts bedside nurses at the helm of robotics research and innovation. At a graduation ceremony April 30, ChristianaCare celebrated the first four clinical nurses completing the Nursing Research Fellowship in Robotics and Innovation — the first program of its kind in the nation. The fellowship was part of a larger three-year, $1.5 million grant from the American Nurses Foundation’s Reimagining Nursing Initiative. The grant supports ChristianaCare’s broader study on how collaborative robots impact nursing practice. Over eight months, nurses from different units and specialties participated in immersive research training and lectures designed to expand their knowledge, curiosity and professional growth. Their work culminated in national conference presentations and preparations for journal submissions. The inaugural Nursing Research Fellows in Robotics and Innovation are: Briana Abernathy, BSN, RN, CEN – case management, Christiana Hospital emergency department Elizabeth Mitchell, BSN, RN-BC – Christiana Hospital surgical stepdown unit Hannah Rackie, BSN, RN, C-EFM – Union Hospital maternity unit Morgan Tallo, BSN, RN, CCRN – Christiana Hospital cardiovascular critical care unit A ‘real seat at the table’ “When you create programs that empower nurses to lead, innovate and tackle meaningful challenges, you see real impact — not just in new skills and knowledge, but in job satisfaction, well-being and retention,” said Susan Smith Birkhoff, Ph.D., RN, program director of Technology Research & Education at ChristianaCare. “This fellowship is built on the belief that when nurses are given the space to learn and lead, they bring fresh ideas and collaborative solutions back to their clinical practice areas.” Created and led by Smith Birkhoff, the fellowship is a standout in the U.S. health care landscape: It gives bedside nurses the chance to step away from their daily routines and gain advanced research experience, an opportunity rarely available at the clinical level. While the fellowship directly trained four nurses, its reach extended well beyond thazt. Fellows shared what they were learning along the way, sparking wider interest in research across the health system. The research program was highlighted as a new knowledge and innovation exemplar in the latest evaluation by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, which in March awarded ChristianaCare its fourth Magnet designation — the gold standard for nursing excellence. Adriane Griffen, DrPH, MPH, MCHES, vice president of programs at the American Nurses Foundation, praised ChristianaCare’s responsiveness in shaping the program around nurses’ needs and building a model for future innovation. “What makes this fellowship stand out is its focus on giving bedside nurses a real seat at the table,” Griffen said. “When nurses are trusted to lead and have the right support, they develop solutions that are practical, sustainable and transformative. This fellowship shows how nurse-led innovation can grow from a local pilot into a model for improving care across the country.” Through the fellowship, nurses gained a deeper understanding of applying research methodology to advance robotics science at the intersection of nursing and hospital operations, which is groundbreaking and novel. “This is such an exciting and important moment for our profession,” said Danielle Weber, DNP, RN, NEA-BC, chief nurse executive at ChristianaCare. “Innovation is about improving care, easing the burdens on our teams and finding smarter ways to meet the complex needs of our patients. Tools like collaborative robots don’t replace the human touch, they help protect and elevate it.” Mitchell said she was initially intimidated when she saw the fellowship application because it had been years since she last engaged in formal research. Learning everything from literature reviews to abstract writing pushed her outside her comfort zone and gave her practical tools to take new ideas forward. The experience inspired her to return to school this fall to pursue a graduate degree. A ‘ripple effect’ “This fellowship reignited my enthusiasm for learning and gave me the skills and confidence to keep growing,” Mitchell said. “It’s been amazing to collaborate with other fellows and mentors, and I’m excited to apply what I’ve learned to improve patient care and strengthen our teams.” In addition to Smith Birkhoff, Kate Shady, Ph.D., RN, OCN, RN IV, served as a mentor to the fellows, bringing expertise from her hematology/oncology background. Kati Patel, MPH, provided key administrative coordination and support throughout the program. ChristianaCare continues its broader research into robotics integration, with findings from the multi-year collaborative robot study expected to be shared later this year. Shady said the fellowship is already influencing ChristianaCare’s nursing culture by expanding interest in research and evidence-based practice well beyond the initial group. The program’s ripple effect is helping build lasting infrastructure for nurse-led innovation across departments. “One of the most rewarding parts of this fellowship has been seeing these nurses step into new confidence and capability,” Shady said. “They began unsure about research, but by the end, they were reading studies, writing abstracts and mentoring peers — laying the groundwork for bigger change in how we advance nursing practice.” Learn more about nursing at ChristianaCare.
Today, on CAA’s National Slow Down, Move Over Day, the Government of Manitoba, the RCMP and CAA representatives came together at the Manitoba Legislature to remind motorists about the importance of Manitoba’s Slow Down, Move Over law (SDMO), a life-saving law designed to protect emergency responders and roadside workers. “We are pleased that the Manitoba government has proclaimed May 13th as Slow Down Move Over Day to help bring awareness to the laws designed to protect emergency responders, tow operators, and highway workers who are stopped on the side of the road to save lives on Manitoba roadways,” said Ewald Friesen, manager of government relations for CAA Manitoba. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Lisa Naylor stated, “Every day, workers risk their lives to keep our roads safe and we are asking Manitoba drivers to take one simple, life-saving action: slow down and move over.” The timing is especially important as Canada Road Safety Week begins on May 13, shining a broader spotlight on making Canadian roads safer for all. CAA has been the leading advocate in Canada to ensure that 'Slow Down, Move Over' laws include tow trucks, along with police, ambulance and fire. "Most drivers tend to slow down and move over for police cars, ambulances, and fire trucks, but this is lower for tow trucks. It's important to always remember that for many, the side of the road is someone's workplace, and everyone deserves a safe place to work. Slow Down, Move Over laws protect our roadside rescuers, and the stranded drivers we serve every day,” reinforced Friesen. CAA’s research shows that Manitobans care deeply about the safety of emergency vehicles, drivers and stranded motorists. Data also shows that 8 in ten CAA Members have heard of the Slow Down, Move Over law, and 99 per cent support it. Just over half, however, know the definition of the law, underscoring that there is still important work to do to help drivers understand exactly what the law requires a driver to do. Over 1/3 of members are not aware of specific penalties, though they do know a penalty exists and 4 in ten Manitobans aged 65 and above are unaware of any penalties. Sergeant Mark Hume, Unit Commander, North West Traffic Services, Manitoba RCMP highlighted, “Violators can be charged under Section 109.1(2) of the Highway Traffic Act ($298 fine) at a minimum. Aggravated circumstances can result in more severe charges.” The consequences of neglecting these laws can be tragic, not only for roadside workers but also for drivers and passengers. The hope is that this initiative will help remind drivers of the importance of safe driving behaviours and encourage everyone to do their part to keep Manitoba’s roads and highways safe. “Through education and awareness of ‘Slow Down, Move Over’ laws, we wish to support drivers in their crucial role in preventing incidents and fostering a culture of care and safety on Manitoba's highways,” continued Friesen. If you see an emergency vehicle or tow operator up ahead, reduce your speed and move to an open lane if it is safe to do so. If the posted speed limit is less than 80 km/h you are required to slow down to 40 km/h. If the posted speed limit is 80 km/h or higher you are required to slow down to 60 km/h. For more information about the Slow Down, Move Over law, visit: https://www.caamanitoba.com/advocacy/government-relations/slow-down The online survey was conducted by via an online quantitative survey with 916 CAA Members in Manitoba between February 3 and February 11, 2025. Based on the sample size of n=916 and with a confidence level of 95%, the margin of error for this research is +/- 3.24%.)
