Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Ocean Tomo Releases 2025 Intangible Asset Market Value Study Results

Global consulting firm J.S. Held announces the release of the Ocean Tomo Intangible Asset Market Value (IAMV) study. With this release, the study now reflects a panel of 50 years of data in the US market and 20 years of data in foreign markets. The study examines the components of market value, specifically the role of intangible assets, across a range of global indexes. IAMV is shown as of calendar year end by subtracting net tangible asset value from market capitalization. Commenting on the Components of S&P 500® Market Value, economic expert and study author Matthew Johnson observes, “the composition of corporate value has undergone a fundamental transformation over the past five decades.” In 1975, tangible assets—property, plant, equipment, inventory, and other physical capital—represented 83% of the market value of companies comprising the S&P 500 index, with intangible assets accounting for only 17%. By the end of 2025, this relationship had completely inverted: intangible assets now constitute approximately 92% of S&P 500 market capitalization, while tangible assets have been reduced to a mere 8%. Johnson adds, “This 75 percentage point shift represents what Ocean Tomo has defined as ‘economic inversion’— a wholesale transformation in the nature of value creation whereby economic worth has migrated from what can be ‘touched’ to what can be ‘thought’." The magnitude and implications of this transformation are comparable to the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries. Just as the Industrial Revolution fundamentally restructured economic activity from agrarian and craft-based production to mechanized manufacturing, the intangible revolution has redefined the sources and measurement of corporate value in the 21st century. Ocean Tomo Co-founder and J.S. Held Chief Intellectual Property Officer, James E. Malackowski observes, “While the Industrial Revolution required a century to unfold fully, the intangible revolution has occurred within a single human lifespan, with particularly rapid acceleration occurring in the 1985-2005 period when intangible asset market value increased from 32% to 79%—a remarkable 47 percentage point surge in just two decades.” The 2020-2025 period deserves special attention: S&P 500 IAMV remained stable at approximately 90% despite the Federal Reserve implementing the most aggressive monetary tightening cycle in four decades. Dr. Nikki Tavasoli, PhD, shares, “Traditional financial theory predicts that intangible-intensive firms should be highly sensitive to interest rate changes due to their long-duration cash flows and limited collateral value.” She adds, “The observed stability challenges this prediction and requires explanation, which we address in a forthcoming paper.” In 2005, the IAMV study was expanded beyond the S&P 500 to explore the components of value in several key international markets. Stock market indexes from Europe, China, Japan, and South Korea were selected and analyzed to determine the comparable role of intangible assets. To learn more about the 2025 Intangible Asset Market Value Study, please visit: Media Contact Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held 1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com JSHeld.com

Surprising finding could pave way for universal cancer vaccine

An experimental mRNA vaccine boosted the tumor-fighting effects of immunotherapy in a mouse-model study, bringing researchers one step closer to their goal of developing a universal vaccine to “wake up” the immune system against cancer. Published today in Nature Biomedical Engineering, the University of Florida study showed that like a one-two punch, pairing the test vaccine with common anticancer drugs called immune checkpoint inhibitors triggered a strong antitumor response in laboratory mice. A surprising element, researchers said, was that they achieved the promising results not by attacking a specific target protein expressed in the tumor, but by simply revving up the immune system — spurring it to respond as if fighting a virus. They did this by stimulating the expression of a protein called PD-L1 inside of tumors, making them more receptive to treatment. The research was supported by multiple federal agencies and foundations, including the National Institutes of Health. Senior author Elias Sayour, M.D., Ph.D., a UF Health pediatric oncologist and the Stop Children's Cancer/Bonnie R. Freeman Professor for Pediatric Oncology Research, said the results reveal a potential future treatment path — an alternative to surgery, radiation and chemotherapy — with broad implications for battling many types of treatment-resistant tumors. “This paper describes a very unexpected and exciting observation: that even a vaccine not specific to any particular tumor or virus — so long as it is an mRNA vaccine — could lead to tumor-specific effects,” said Sayour, principal investigator at the RNA Engineering Laboratory within UF’s Preston A. Wells Jr. Center for Brain Tumor Therapy. “This finding is a proof of concept that these vaccines potentially could be commercialized as universal cancer vaccines to sensitize the immune system against a patient’s individual tumor,” said Sayour, a McKnight Brain Institute investigator and co-leader of a program in immuno-oncology and microbiome research. Until now, there have been two main ideas in cancer-vaccine development: To find a specific target expressed in many people with cancer, or to tailor a vaccine that is specific to targets expressed within a patient's own cancer. “This study suggests a third emerging paradigm,” said Duane Mitchell, M.D., Ph.D., a co-author of the paper. “What we found is by using a vaccine designed not to target cancer specifically but rather to stimulate a strong immunologic response, we could elicit a very strong anticancer reaction. And so this has significant potential to be broadly used across cancer patients — even possibly leading us to an off-the-shelf cancer vaccine.” For more than eight years, Sayour has pioneered high-tech anticancer vaccines by combining lipid nanoparticles and mRNA. Short for messenger RNA, mRNA is found inside every cell — including tumor cells — and serves as a blueprint for protein production. This new study builds upon a breakthrough last year by Sayour’s lab: In a first-ever human clinical trial, an mRNA vaccine quickly reprogrammed the immune system to attack glioblastoma, an aggressive brain tumor with a dismal prognosis. Among the most impressive findings in the four-patient trial was how quickly the new method — which used a “specific” or personalized vaccine made using a patient’s own tumor cells — spurred a vigorous immune-system response to reject the tumor. In the latest study, Sayour’s research team adapted their technology to test a “generalized” mRNA vaccine — meaning it was not aimed at a specific virus or mutated cells of cancer but engineered simply to prompt a strong immune system response. The mRNA formulation was made similarly to the COVID-19 vaccines, rooted in similar technology, but wasn’t aimed directly at the well-known spike protein of COVID. In mouse models of melanoma, the team saw promising results in normally treatment-resistant tumors when combining the mRNA formulation with a common immunotherapy drug called a PD-1 inhibitor, a type of monoclonal antibody that attempts to “educate” the immune system that a tumor is foreign, said Sayour, a professor in UF’s Lillian S. Wells Department of Neurosurgery and the Department of Pediatrics in the UF College of Medicine. Taking the research a step further, in mouse models of skin, bone and brain cancers, the investigators found beneficial effects when testing a different mRNA formulation as a solo treatment. In some models, the tumors were eliminated entirely. Sayour and colleagues observed that using an mRNA vaccine to activate immune responses seemingly unrelated to cancer could prompt T cells that weren’t working before to actually multiply and kill the cancer if the response spurred by the vaccine is strong enough. Taken together, the study’s implications are striking, said Mitchell, who directs the UF Clinical and Translational Science Institute and co-directs UF’s Preston A. Wells Jr. Center for Brain Tumor Therapy. “It could potentially be a universal way of waking up a patient’s own immune response to cancer,” Mitchell said. “And that would be profound if generalizable to human studies.” The results, he said, show potential for a universal cancer vaccine that could activate the immune system and prime it to work in tandem with checkpoint inhibitor drugs to seize upon cancer — or in some cases, even work on its own to kill cancer. Now, the research team is working to improve current formulations and move to human clinical trials as rapidly as possible. While the experimental mRNA vaccine at this point is in early preclinical testing — in mice not humans — information about available nonrelated human clinical trials at UF Health can be viewed here.

Psychologists introduce third path to a ‘good life’ — one full of curiosity and challenge

For centuries, scholars and scientists have defined the “good life” in one of two ways: a life that is rooted in happiness, characterized by positive emotions, or one that is centered on meaning, guided by purpose and personal fulfillment. But what if there is another, equally valuable path — one that prioritizes challenge, change and curiosity? “We found that what was missing was psychological richness — experiences that challenge you, change your perspective and satisfy your curiosity.” — Erin Westgate, Ph.D., assistant professor psychology, director of the Florida Social Cognition and Emotion Lab This third dimension, which may result in a more psychologically rich life for some, is being explored in a new study — led by University of Florida psychologist Erin Westgate, Ph.D., in collaboration with Shigehiro Oishi, Ph.D., of the University of Chicago. According to their research, some people prioritize variety, novelty and intellectually stimulating experiences, even when those experiences are difficult, unpleasant or lack clear meaning. “This idea came from the question: Why do some people feel unfulfilled even when they have happy and meaningful lives?” Westgate said. “We found that what was missing was psychological richness — experiences that challenge you, change your perspective and satisfy your curiosity.” Westgate and Oishi’s research shows that a psychologically rich life is distinct from lives defined by happiness or meaning. While happiness focuses on feeling good, and meaning is about doing good, richness is about thinking deeply and seeing the world differently. And for a significant minority of people around the world, that third path is the one they would choose — even if it means giving up happiness or meaning. A new way to think about the ‘good life’ According to Westgate and Oishi, psychological richness is defined as a life filled with diverse, perspective-changing experiences — whether these are external, such as traveling or undertaking new challenges, or internal, like absorbing powerful books or pieces of music. “A psychologically rich life can come from something as simple as reading a great novel or hearing a haunting song,” Westgate said. “It doesn’t have to be about dramatic events, but it can shift the way you see the world.” Unlike happy or meaningful experiences, rich experiences are not always pleasant or purposeful. “College is a good example. It’s not always fun, and you might not always feel a deep sense of meaning, but it changes how you think,” Westgate said. “The same goes for experiences like living through a hurricane. You wouldn’t call it happy or even meaningful, but it shakes up your perspective.” Researchers in Westgate’s lab at UF have been studying how people respond to events like hurricanes, tracking students’ emotions and reactions as storms approach. The results show that many people have viewed these challenging experiences as psychologically rich — altering how they saw the world, even if they didn’t enjoy them. The roots of the idea While the study is new, the concept has been years in the making. Westgate and Oishi first introduced the term “psychologically rich life” in 2022, building on earlier research and scale development around 2015. Their latest paper expands the idea, showing that the concept resonates with people across cultures and fills a gap in how people define well-being. “In psychology and philosophy, dating back to Aristotle, there’s been a focus on hedonic versus eudaimonic well-being — happiness versus meaning,” Westgate said. “What we’re doing is saying, there’s another path that’s just as important. And for some people, it’s the one they value most.” While many people ideally want all three — happiness, meaning and richness — there are trade-offs. Rich experiences often come at the cost of comfort or clarity. “Interesting experiences aren’t always pleasant experiences,” Westgate said. “But they’re the ones that help us grow and see the world in new ways.” Westgate hopes the study will broaden how psychologists and the public think about what it means to live well. “We’re not saying happiness and meaning aren’t important,” Westgate said. “They are. But we’re also saying don’t forget about richness. Some of the most important experiences in life are the ones that challenge us, that surprise us and that make us see the world differently.”

‘Love Island’ isn’t real, but it might reflect the way we date

For millions of viewers, “Love Island” has been a summer obsession – a chance to peek in on a sunny villa full of beautiful singles looking for love. But according to Andrew Selepak, Ph.D., a media professor at the University of Florida, the reality show isn’t really about romance. “The reality of reality TV is that it doesn’t reflect reality,” Selepak said. “These are people who were selected; they were cast just like you would cast a movie or a scripted TV show.” Still, what happens on the island isn’t completely disconnected from real life. The show's format, which is built on snap decisions, physical attraction, and frequent recouplings, mirrors the current dating landscape in unsettling ways. “I think it's reflective of the current culture that young people are experiencing with dating, which is very superficial and doesn't lead to long-term lasting relationships because a long-term lasting relationship can't be based on superficial qualities,” Selepak said. Selepak compares “Love Island” to “TV Tinder.” Much like on dating apps, contestants size each other up based on looks and vibes rather than values or long-term compatibility. And while the show promotes the idea of finding “the one,” the numbers tell a different story. “It’s like less than 12% of the couples actually remain together for any period of time,” Selepak said. “At some point, you would think people would realize it’s fake.” However, viewers continue to watch, and contestants continue to sign up. Why? Because the point isn't necessarily to find love. It's about visibility, likes and followers. “This is where you have the social media aspect playing in, where people are looking to become influencers and to gain fame, notoriety, likes and follows,” Selepak said. “The people who are on the shows, these are people who intentionally have gone out and said, 'I want my dirty laundry to be on TV.’ There's a narcissistic aspect of wanting to be on a show like that. Most people, I think, would be hesitant to tell their deep, dark secrets – or tell the things about themselves that they would normally only share with a select few – to a large audience.” For contestants, this often means performing love rather than experiencing it – a behavior that echoes real-world dating on social media. For audiences, “Love Island” gives them the dissatisfaction of watching beautiful people experience the same dating struggles they do. In the end, “Love Island” may not teach us how to find lasting love, but it might explain why so many people are struggling to.

A future in pharmacy, made possible by support and mentorship

A freshman chemistry major from Hinesville, Georgia, Geovanii Pacheco already has his sights set on a career in pharmacy. His ambition is rooted not just in a love for science, but in personal experience. Growing up, his family spent countless hours navigating prescriptions and insurance coverage for his older brother, Devin, who has autism. During those moments, one pharmacist consistently stood out. This was someone who advocated for his family, helped them through paperwork and made sure Devin got the medication he needed. “It really resonated with me,” Pacheco said. “As a pharmacist, I’d like to embody what she did for us, for others as well.” That goal brought Pacheco to Georgia Southern University where he is now supported by the National Science Foundation’s S-STEM Scholarship Program Award. This is a nearly $2 million grant designed to support Pell-eligible students pursuing degrees in biochemistry, biology, chemistry, geosciences, mathematics, physics or sustainability science. For Pacheco, the program has been nothing short of life-changing. “I can say that I’m not going to college with any financial stress,” he said. “I have no money coming out-of-pocket.” Administered through Georgia Southern’s College of Science and Mathematics, the federally funded program provides last-dollar scholarships that cover remaining costs after Pell Grants and other aid are applied. In addition to financial support, the program pairs students with dedicated faculty mentors and offers structured programming aimed at retention, professional development and long-term success. Sara Gremillion, Ph.D., professor of biology and principal investigator on the grant, said the goal is to ensure that students don’t just enroll in college, but that they also thrive once they arrive. “They may not have a strong expectation about what to expect in college,” said Gremillion. “This program not only removes financial barriers, but it also surrounds students with the support they need to navigate college and plan for their future.” Pacheco has felt that impact from day one. Thanks to the program, he moved into his residence hall a week early to attend a one-week Basebamp program to jump start his college experience. There, he met fellow scholarship recipients and connected with his faculty mentor before classes even began. His mentor, Shainaz Landge, Ph.D., associate professor of chemistry, has helped connect Pacheco with opportunities from joining the Student Affiliates of the American Chemical Society to learning about upcoming pre-pharmacy organizations and undergraduate research. “Students such as Geovanii serve as prime examples of the fulfillment derived from mentorship and teaching,” said Landge. “Their growth and engagement highlight the critical role that effective mentorship plays in fostering both academic development.” That blend of mentorship and financial support is exactly what the grant was designed to provide. Over five years, the program will serve dozens of students in eligible majors such as chemistry, biology, biomedical science, biochemistry, physics, mathematics, sustainability science and geoscience. Each student receives individualized scholarship support, up to $15,000 per year, based on need, along with a faculty mentor who stays with them throughout their undergraduate journey. For Pacheco and his family, the scholarship brought immediate relief. He vividly remembers opening the acceptance email with his mother and scrolling down to see the financial aid details. “She was tickled, let me tell you,” he said. “It lifted so much stress off her shoulders. It was life-changing.” Applications to be part of the next cohort of COSM S-STEM Scholars are open until Feb. 1, 2026. Eligibility requirements, necessary documentation and other information can be found at this webpage. Looking to know more about Georgia Southern University or the National Science Foundation’s S-STEM Scholarship Program Award? Simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.

Scientist’s cat, again, helps discover new virus

Pepper, the pet cat who made headlines last year for his role in the discovery of the first jeilongvirus found in the U.S., is at it again. This time, his hunting prowess contributed to the identification of a new strain of orthoreovirus. John Lednicky, Ph.D., Pepper’s owner and a University of Florida College of Public Health and Health Professions virologist, took Pepper’s catch — a dead Everglades short-tailed shrew — into the lab for testing as part of his ongoing work to understand transmission of the mule deerpox virus. Testing revealed the shrew had a previously unidentified strain of orthoreovirus. Viruses in this genus are known to infect humans, white-tailed deer, bats and other mammals. While orthoreoviruses’ effects on humans are not yet well understood, there have been rare reports of the virus being associated with cases of encephalitis, meningitis and gastroenteritis in children. “The bottom line is we need to pay attention to orthoreoviruses, and know how to rapidly detect them,” said Lednicky, a research professor in the PHHP Department of Environmental and Global Health and a member of UF’s Emerging Pathogens Institute. The UF team published the complete genomic coding sequences for the virus they named “Gainesville shrew mammalian orthoreovirus type 3 strain UF-1” in the journal Microbiology Resource Announcements. “There are many different mammalian orthoreoviruses and not enough is known about this recently identified virus to be concerned,” said the paper’s lead author Emily DeRuyter, a UF Ph.D. candidate in One Health. “Mammalian orthoreoviruses were originally considered to be ‘orphan’ viruses, present in mammals including humans, but not associated with diseases. More recently, they have been implicated in respiratory, central nervous system and gastrointestinal diseases.” The Lednicky lab’s jeilongvirus and orthoreovirus discoveries come on the heels of the team publishing their discovery of two other novel viruses found in farmed white-tailed deer. Given the propensity of viruses to constantly evolve, paired with the team’s sophisticated lab techniques, finding new viruses isn’t entirely surprising, Lednicky said. “I’m not the first one to say this, but essentially, if you look, you’ll find, and that’s why we keep finding all these new viruses,” Lednicky said. Like influenza virus, two different types of orthoreovirus can infect a host cell, causing the viruses’ genes to mix and match, in essence, creating a brand new virus, Lednicky said. In 2019, Lednicky and colleagues isolated the first orthoreovirus found in a deer. That strain’s genes were nearly identical to an orthoreovirus found in farmed mink in China and a deathly ill lion in Japan. How in the world, the scientific community wondered, could the same hybrid virus appear in a farmed deer in Florida and two species of carnivores across the globe? Some experts speculated that components of the animals’ feed could have come from the same manufacturer. With so many unanswered questions about orthoreoviruses and their modes of transmission, prevalence in human and animal hosts and just how sick they could make us, more research is needed, DeRuyter and Lednicky said. Next steps would include serology and immunology studies to understand the threat Gainesville shrew mammalian orthoreovirus type 3 strain UF-1 may hold for humans, wildlife and pets. For readers concerned about Pepper’s health, rest assured. He has shown no signs of illness from his outdoor adventures and will likely continue to contribute to scientific discovery through specimen collection.    “This was an opportunistic study,” Lednicky said. “If you come across a dead animal, why not test it instead of just burying it? There is a lot of information that can be gained.”

The Double-Edged Scroll: Why Passive Screen Time Drains You More Than Active Use

Most conversations about “screen time” focus on hours. But newer research and what clinicians see in practice suggest how you use your phone may matter as much as how much you use it. A 2024 meta-analysis of 141 studies on active vs passive social media use found that, overall, effects are small, but there is a pattern: passive use (just scrolling and watching) is more consistently associated with worse emotional outcomes, while some forms of active use (commenting, messaging, posting) show small links to greater wellbeing and online social support. (OUP Academic) Other work from Frontiers in Psychology suggests that the emotional impact of passive use depends heavily on how you feel about the content: when it triggers envy, comparison or negativity, mental ill-being goes up; when it’s genuinely positive, the effect can be neutral or even slightly protective for some users. (Frontiers) Reviews also point to upward social comparison, FOMO and rumination as key pathways linking passive browsing to lower wellbeing. (ScienceDirect) Psychotherapist Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW works with teens and adults who feel “wiped out” by their feeds and draws a sharp line between passive and active tech use: “Don’t do passive tech use — that doom scrolling, or content just being thrown at you,” she says. “I want people to engage in active tech use. Go and search something up, choose the long-form video you actually want, talk to your friends. Don’t let the app decide everything you see — especially for kids, who are getting content they’re not ready for and didn’t sign up for.” She notes that many of her clients describe feeling “numb, anxious or wired” after long passive sessions, a sign that their nervous system is being pulled around by unpredictable, emotionally loaded content rather than chosen experiences. She also discussed the short term recall related to scrolling: "Some of my clients can't even remember what content they consumed right after scrolling. However, we know that what we pay attention to and what we show our brains has an impact on our thoughts, mindset, feelings and overall internal world." Offline.now founder Eli Singer frames this as a design problem, not a moral failing. The platform’s research shows people already spend about 10 of their 16 waking hours on screens; the realistic goal is to upgrade some of that time, not pretend we can all go offline. His advice: instead of vowing to “get off your phone,” start by swapping just 20 minutes a day from passive to active use; for example, messaging a friend to meet up, learning something specific, or planning an offline activity. “When people tell us they feel overwhelmed by their screen habits, it’s not laziness, it’s a crisis of confidence,” Singer says. “We don’t need perfect digital detoxes. We need small, winnable shifts, like taking one block of passive scrolling and turning it into something you actually chose.” For journalists, the story isn’t simply “screens are bad.” It’s that passive, algorithm-driven scrolling is where comparison, FOMO and emotional overload tend to pile up and that helping people change how they use their devices may be more realistic, and more effective, than focusing on raw minutes alone. Featured Experts Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW – Psychotherapist specializing in ADHD, anxiety, insomnia and digital dependency. She helps teens and adults understand how doomscrolling and passive feeds hijack dopamine and mood, and teaches practical shifts toward more intentional, “active” tech use. Eli Singer – Founder of Offline.now and author of Offline.now: A Practical Guide to Healthy Digital Balance. He brings proprietary data on digital overwhelm and the “confidence gap,” and shows how 20-minute “micro-wins” like upgrading one chunk of passive screen time can change people’s relationship with their phones without extreme detoxes. Expert interviews can be arranged through the Offline.now media team.

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:

Training champions: University of Delaware experts prepares students Olympic success

University of Delaware students, alumni and experts are very involved with this year's Olympics. The following are available for interview.  Alumni Attending Olympic Games  Shannon Colleton is a 2022 graduate of UD's Physical Therapy Sports Residency Program heading to the Winter Olympics with the U.S. Ski and Snowboard Team. She's specifically working as a PT for the women's speed skiing team (Super G and the downhill competitions). Students Covering Olympics Cris Granada, a senior communication major and member of UD's soccer team, has parlayed a summer internship with NBC Sports into a position as a production assistant with the network at the Winter Olympics. Professors with Olympic Expertise Matthew Robinson, professor of sport management in Lerner, is an all-around Olympics expert. He can talk about the host city, Milan, and the IOC's evolving model of hosting games in multiple locations. He can also talk about the idea of sport as a unifier despite what's going on in the world around us. Robinson can also talk about the burden the NHL faces, having to pause its season so players can compete on the world stage. While it's an honor to have an athlete represent their country on the world stage, it's also a risk to the professional team if they get hurt. The NBA feels similarly about the Summer Games. Soccer also pauses for the World Cup. Jeffrey Schneider, clinical instructor of kinesiology and applied physiology, has worked with Olympic figure skaters in the past and can speak as an expert on this sport. Thomas Buckley, professor of kinesiology and applied physiology, is an expert in ice hockey and bobsledding. He can talk about common injuries, risks/benefits. He noted that bobsledding has a surprisingly high rate of concussion and repetitive head trauma due to the speed of the sport. To contact Robinson and Buckley directly, visit their profile pages and click the "contact" button. Interviews for all the experts featured here can also be arranged by contacting mediarelations@udel.edu.

Wetlands: Nature’s First Line of Defense for Our Coast and Communities

Since the 1930s, Louisiana’s coastline has been reshaped by the relentless advance of the Gulf, with over 2,000 square miles of land disappearing beneath its waters and representing the largest loss of coastal land anywhere in the continental United States. This dramatic transformation has far-reaching consequences, threatening local economies, delicate ecosystems, and heightening the state’s exposure to hurricanes. In the face of these urgent challenges, LSU’s College of the Coast & Environment (CC&E) stands at the forefront, leading pioneering research and bold initiatives that not only protect Louisiana’s coast, but also build stronger, more resilient communities. Below are just a few examples of how CC&E is driving meaningful solutions for our coastal future. Wetlands are vital to protecting our coast, and CC&E researchers are actively investigating the role of both constructed and natural wetlands in reducing coastal flooding hazards. Through several projects funded through the US Army Corps of Engineers, Drs. Robert Twilley, Matthew Hiatt, and CC&E Dean Clint Willson, along with collaborators across campus, are conducting research on coastal ecosystem design - a framework that leverages the benefits of natural and nature-based coastal features, such as wetlands, environmental levees, and flood control gates – and how that could be integrated into engineering design and urban planning. Through the State of Louisiana’s ambitious Coastal Master Plan, administered by the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, wetland construction and restoration play a huge role in managing the Louisiana coastal region. Such innovative techniques leveraging natural and nature-based features require evaluation to determine the success of such projects, and CC&E researchers are using cutting-edge science to advance this endeavor. Dr. Tracy Quirk and her students are investigating the success of marsh restoration by comparing structural and functional characteristics (e.g., vegetation, elevation, hydrology, accretion, and denitrification) between two created marshes and an adjacent natural reference marsh along the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana. Wetlands not only serve as a buffer from storms and sea level rise but also play a major role in regulating greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to productive vibrant ecosystems. In large collaborative project funded by the National Science Foundation, Dr. Giulio Mariotti is using computer models to forecast how coastal marshes may change in size, shape, and salinity in the future, and how these changes could affect methane emissions. As part of the same project, Drs. Haosheng Huang and Dubravko Justic are creating high-resolution hydrodynamic and biogeochemical models to predict changes in methane emissions in coastal Louisiana. In another project, with funding from Louisiana Center of Excellence, National Science Foundation, Louisiana Sea Grant, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Drs. Matthew Hiatt and John White have established a network of sensors to measure water levels and salinity throughout the wetlands in Barataria Bay, Louisiana, a region that has experienced significant land loss and storm impacts. The goal is to establish an understanding of the drivers of saline intrusion in marsh soils, and to ultimately determine what this means for the ecological resiliency of wetlands experiencing rapid change. CC&E’s leadership in wetlands science is recognized nationwide. It is the only college in the United States to have six faculty members—Drs. John White, John W. Day, Jr., Robert Twilley, William Patrick, James Gosselink, and R. Eugene Turner—honored with the prestigious National Wetlands Award. No other institution has had more than one recipient. Presented annually by the Environmental Law Institute, this award celebrates individuals whose work demonstrates exceptional innovation, dedication, and impact in wetlands conservation and education. CC&E’s unmatched record reflects decades of pioneering research and a deep commitment to safeguarding the nation’s most vulnerable coastal landscapes. Every day, CC&E channels this expertise into action—protecting Louisiana’s coast and, in turn, the communities, wildlife, and ecosystems that depend on it. Through bold research, collaborative partnerships, and a vision grounded in science, the college is shaping a more resilient future for coastal regions everywhere. CC&E is building teams that win in Louisiana, for the world. Article originally published here.