Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Bug Off: Why Some People Are More Attractive to Mosquitoes

Summer means mosquitoes, and with more of the pesky insects buzzing around, more people are grappling with mosquito bites and their consequences, ranging from an itchy inconvenience to serious health risks from vector-borne diseases. If it seems like mosquitoes bite you more than others, you may be right, according to Baylor University mosquito expert Jason Pitts, Ph.D. It simply may come down to how you smell. An associate professor of biology and director of Baylor’s Biology of Global Health 4+1 Program, Pitts focuses his research on mosquitoes and their complex odor-receptors, or sense of smell, to better understand how they locate food sources crucial to survival and reproduction. His impactful work is helping develop new mosquito control methods, which ultimately could lead to a decrease in vector-borne disease transmission around the world. “Many insects find their way around the world through their sense of smell, even more than vision,” Pitts said. “Mosquitoes and other insects really are adept at finding places to lay their eggs, finding flowers on which to feed or finding people on which to blood feed just by the sense of smell.” A mosquito’s strong sense of smell is critical to its survival. While all mosquitoes feed from nectar, only females bite humans and other mammals. They need the blood to support egg development in reproduction, and they rely heavily on scent to locate a host, Pitts said. “As we sweat, we emit volatile odors – or strong smells – which can be very attractive to mosquitoes,” Pitts said, adding that these odors include carboxylic acids, a key component in human sweat, which vary from person to person and can determine how appealing someone is to mosquitoes. Mosquitoes detect these chemicals in a similar way to how humans process smells. Humans have nerves in their nasal passages that, if tuned, will send signal receptors to the brain – the same process for mosquitoes, guiding them toward a potential meal, Pitts said. Because of their efficiency in locating human hosts, mosquitoes are considered to be the deadliest creatures in the world, responsible for more than 700,000 deaths each year from vector-borne diseases they transmit, including yellow fever, Zika, dengue, malaria and West Nile virus. Four D’s of mosquito prevention Whether you are a favorite meal among mosquitoes or not, Pitts recommends following the “Four D’s” of preventing mosquito breeding and bites – Dress, Drain, DEET and Dusk/Dawn. Dress Mosquitoes are attracted to darker colors, so wear light-colored, loose-fitting, long-sleeved shirts and long pants to protect yourself from potential bites. Drain The most important thing anyone can do is to reduce breeding sources for mosquitoes by draining stagnant water. If you have standing water in any kind of container in your yard, get in the habit of emptying those containers, including children’s swimming pools, which should be emptied at least once a week. Defend with DEET The most effective repellent is EPA-approved DEET (N-Diethyl-meta-toluamide). “Once a mosquito lands on the skin, they taste the skin to decide whether this is a good host or not,” Pitts said. “They can actually taste DEET, which is a long-range repellent. They can smell it and avoid it. When they taste it, they will also fly away.” Dusk / Dawn Mosquitoes are more active at dusk and at dawn, when the sun is rising or setting. Avoiding these times will help you avoid bites. If you like to take a morning run or walk at dusk, make sure to apply DEET repellent and wear light-colored clothing. Looking to know more or arrange an interview? Simply click on the icon below and connect with the expert.

James Sample Authors Guest Essay in The New York Times

Professor James Sample of the Maurice A. Deane School of Law has published a guest essay in The New York Times examining a U.S. Supreme Court case that could reshape how courts interpret the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause. In the essay, Sample analyzes Jouppi v. Alaska, a case involving an Alaska pilot whose $95,000 airplane was ordered forfeited after a passenger transported a six-pack of beer to a dry village. He argues that the case gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to clarify when government-imposed financial penalties become so disproportionate that they violate the Constitution’s prohibition on excessive fines, reinforcing an important constitutional safeguard against excessive government power. The essay is the latest example of Sample’s national thought leadership on constitutional law, the Supreme Court, and the rule of law. Throughout the month, he has been a frequent legal analyst for leading national and regional media outlets, offering insight on major Supreme Court decisions, executive power, freedom of the press, immigration, election law, judicial ethics, and other pressing constitutional issues.

Twin earthquakes in Venezuela raise serious concerns over humanitarian, health and infrastructure impacts

Dr Komal Raj Aryal, lecturer in crisis and disaster management at Aston Business School, has expressed serious concern following the powerful twin earthquakes that struck northern Venezuela on 24 June 2026. "The back-to-back earthquakes, measuring magnitude 7.2 and 7.5 and occurring within less than a minute of each other at an approximate depth of 22 km, represent an exceptionally severe seismic event," said Dr Aryal, who has more than 26 years of international research experience in earthquakes, landslides, extreme weather events and disaster risk governance. "The combination of two major earthquakes occurring in rapid succession, their relatively shallow depths, and the repeated strong ground shaking is likely to have substantially increased damage to buildings, transport networks and other critical infrastructure. Scientifically, a magnitude 7.5 earthquake releases approximately three times more energy than a magnitude 7.2 event. Experiencing both events within seconds creates an extremely complex emergency response situation." Dr Aryal highlighted particular concern for San Felipe, an important industrial, commercial and transportation centre with a population of more than 300,000 people. Built across hilly terrain, with steep streets and dense urban development, the city could face significant challenges for emergency access, search and rescue operations, evacuation and humanitarian assistance. Around 10% of the city's population is aged 65 or older, making older adults particularly vulnerable during prolonged emergency situations. "If widespread power outages occur while temperatures remain between 32°C and 35°C, communities will face compounded risks including heat stress, disruption to healthcare services, shortages of clean water, communication failures and interruptions to essential public services. These cascading impacts often become as significant as the direct earthquake damage itself." Based on the available seismic information and preliminary footage shared on social media, Dr Aryal noted that it will likely take days or even weeks before authorities fully understand the extent of structural damage across northern Venezuela. "Initial seismic information suggests a rupture along a major fault system parallel to Venezuela's northern coastline, with areas experiencing extremely intense ground shaking. If confirmed, significant cascading impacts may extend well beyond the epicentral area, affecting multiple urban centres, transport corridors and regional supply chains." Dr Aryal also expressed concern about the resilience of Venezuela's healthcare system. "Northern Venezuela contains a large concentration of hospitals and healthcare facilities. At present, it remains unclear how many medical facilities have been affected by the earthquakes. Any disruption to hospitals, combined with existing pressures on healthcare capacity, medicine supplies and emergency logistics, could significantly affect the delivery of healthcare services for both acute injuries and patients with chronic illnesses." He added that damage to airports, major highways, bridges and other transport infrastructure could delay humanitarian assistance, emergency logistics and economic recovery. "The humanitarian consequences of this disaster will depend not only on the severity of the ground shaking, but also on the resilience of critical infrastructure, the effectiveness of emergency coordination, the availability of healthcare services and the country's broader socioeconomic capacity to recover." Dr Aryal further warned that the immediate earthquake sequence is unlikely to mark the end of the crisis. "Strong aftershocks are highly likely following earthquakes of this magnitude. These may continue for months, and some could themselves be damaging. They increase risks to already weakened buildings, complicate search and rescue operations, trigger additional landslides in mountainous areas, and prolong humanitarian needs." He concluded that while casualty figures and the full extent of the damage remain uncertain, the event has the potential to become one of the most significant seismic disasters in the region in recent years, requiring sustained national and international humanitarian support.

Who Owns the World Cup?

A plan to sell minority stakes in the commercial business surrounding FIFA competitions has triggered a major confrontation with European soccer. UEFA and its 55 national associations have reportedly agreed to boycott FIFA competitions while the proposal remains active. The dispute touches on sports governance, private investment, legal authority, media rights and the growing commercialization of the World Cup. Writing a story around this unprecedented event?  Connect with leading experts below for insight and commentary. Matthew Robinson — University of Delaware Robinson specializes in international sports governance, sport diplomacy and global sport development. His work is particularly relevant to the power struggle between FIFA, UEFA and national associations—and what a coordinated European boycott could mean for FIFA’s authority. Thomas Smith — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Smith studies sports economics, finance and the business of entertainment. He can provide insight into the financial thinking behind FIFA’s proposal, including the trade-off between receiving capital now and sharing future World Cup revenues. Tim Derdenger — Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business Derdenger studies sports markets, sponsorship and the commercialization of major sporting events. His research is relevant to the potential effects on broadcast value, sponsors, fan interest and the overall World Cup brand. Klaas Baks — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Baks specializes in private equity, alternative investments, mergers and acquisitions and business valuation. His expertise can help explain how investors might value FIFA’s commercial assets and what they would typically expect from a minority investment. Andrew Brandt — Villanova University Brandt’s expertise spans sports law and sports business. That experience is relevant to questions about FIFA’s authority over its members, the legal consequences of a boycott and the potential impact on players, sponsors, broadcasters and host countries. Tim DeSchriver — University of Delaware DeSchriver researches sport finance, economics and marketing. His work can help frame the broader financial question: Is FIFA unlocking the value of its competitions, or giving up a share of long-term revenue in exchange for immediate funding? Reach out to these experts now for your next story.  All inquiries are monitored to ensure time-sensitive request and deadlines are met. For more FIFA and WorldCup information visit our World Cup Expert Hubs.

The Truth About “Negative-Calorie” Cucumbers

As summer temperatures climb, so does interest in cucumbers — crunchy, hydrating, and long rumored to be a “negative-calorie food” that burns more energy to digest than it provides. It's a claim that circulates every year in diet culture, but it isn't true. The New York Times recently set out to separate the nutrition science from the myth, and turned to registered dietitians for a clear-eyed answer. Dr. Gina Jarman Hill is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Nutritional Sciences at Texas Christian University. A Registered and Licensed Dietitian, she has worked as a clinical and consultant dietitian and is a member of the Hunger and Environmental Nutrition (HEN) and Dietitians in Integrative and Functional Medicine dietetic practice groups. Her teaching and research center on food and sustainability, nutrition ecology, community nutrition, and public health — with particular expertise in food security, urban agriculture, and hunger. She earned her BS, MS, and PhD in Food and Nutrition from Texas Tech University and was named the Texas Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Outstanding Nutrition Educator in 2017. Dr. Hill was recently featured in The New York Times article “How Healthy Are Cucumbers?” by Amanda Schupak (July 13, 2026), which examines what cucumbers do — and don't — offer nutritionally. Read the full article here. A 10.5-ounce unpeeled garden cucumber, for instance, contains just over one cup of water and 45 calories. Gina Jarman Hill, a professor of nutritional sciences at Texas Christian University, said there is a common misconception that cucumbers are “negative-calorie foods” — meaning they contain fewer calories than it takes to burn digesting them. “There’s no such thing as a ‘negative-calorie food,’” she said, but because the number of calories in cucumbers is so low, they’re about as close as you will get to one. As long as you’re mindful of what you pair them with, Dr. Hill said, there is no reason to curb your cucumber consumption. Dr. Hill is available to speak with media on nutrition myths, food security, sustainable and urban agriculture, community nutrition education, and healthy eating on a budget — timely topics as outlets continue to cover diet trends, food waste, and seasonal eating. To arrange an interview or request a comment, click through to Dr. Hill's profile below.

MEDIA RELEASE: CAA survey finds 98 per cent of Manitoba drivers have witnessed dangerous driving behaviours on Manitoba roads

Nearly all Manitoba drivers have witnessed dangerous driving on the roads in the past year, yet many do not believe they contribute to the problem, according to a new survey by CAA Manitoba. The findings show that 98 per cent of Manitoba drivers have observed dangerous driving behaviours, including speeding (83 per cent), distracted driving (75 per cent) and unsafe lane changes (74 per cent). However, 59 per cent admit they have engaged in at least one dangerous driving behaviour themselves, revealing a significant disconnect between what drivers see and how they assess their own actions behind the wheel. Most Drivers See Dangerous Behaviour, Fewer Admit to It “Most drivers can easily identify unsafe behaviour in others, but many don't recognize when they're doing it themselves,” says Ewald Friesen, manager, government and community relations, CAA Manitoba. “Improving road safety starts with honest self-reflection. Every driver has a role to play in making Manitoba roads safer.” Speeding remains the most common dangerous driving behaviour reported by Manitoba drivers. Four in 10 drivers admit to speeding, while more than one-third of those who speed say they regularly travel 10 to 19 km/h above the posted limit. The survey also found that 65 per cent of drivers say they slow down when they realize they are speeding, suggesting awareness can help influence behaviour. Distracted driving continues to be a major concern. According to a separate survey conducted by CAA Manitoba, nearly half of Manitoba drivers say they have been distracted while driving at some point, and 15 per cent report being involved in a collision caused by distracted driving. Rear-end collisions are the most common type of crash linked to distraction. In many cases, those affected were not the distracted drivers themselves, highlighting the broader consequences these behaviours can have on other road users. “Distracted driving is entirely preventable,” said Friesen. “Whether it's checking a notification, adjusting a device, eating, or grooming, by taking your eyes off the road for just a few seconds, the consequences can be sudden and life-altering. Staying focused behind the wheel protects not only you, but everyone around you.” Drivers Support Stronger Enforcement and Penalties Manitobans strongly support enforcement measures aimed at improving road safety. The survey found that 88 per cent support current fines and penalties related to speeding, while 64 per cent believe stricter penalties would help discourage speeding. More than one-third of drivers say existing penalties have already influenced how they drive. As Manitobans prepare for the upcoming long weekend, CAA Manitoba is encouraging drivers to stay focused, alert and aware behind the wheel. For more information about road safety advocacy and research, visit caamanitoba.com/advocacy. Speeding and Dangerous Driving Behaviour Survey Methodology: The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from March 10 to March 20, 2026, with 503 Manitoba drivers aged 18 and older. Based on the sample size of n=503 and with a confidence level of 95 per cent, the margin of error for this research is +/- 3%.) Distracted Driving Survey Methodology: The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from February 3 to February 13, 2026, with 500 Manitoba drivers aged 18 and older. Based on the sample size of n=500 and with a confidence level of 95 per cent, the margin of error for this research is +/- 3%.)

There's No Such Thing as the Average Canadian Retiree. There Are Three.

You've seen the photo. Silver-haired couple on a sailboat, or walking on a beach at golden hour, laughing about nothing in particular. It's on the cover of every retirement brochure ever printed. It's what "the average Canadian retiree" looks like. In thirty years of banking, I never met that couple. I met a widow in her seventies deciding between a dental crown and her property taxes. I met a couple in their sixties quietly draining their RRSPs to keep a grandchild in university. And yes, I met people with sailboats, though they weren't asking me about retirement income. They were asking about estate freezes and charitable foundations. Three conversations. Three completely different Canadians. And after three decades of having them, most recently as a vice president at one of Canada's Schedule I banks, I've come to believe our biggest retirement problem isn't that Canadians plan badly. It's that we keep designing for an "average retiree" who doesn't exist. In The Canadian Retirement Evolution, a report newly published by EY that I was proud to co-author, I make the case for seeing Canadian retirees as three distinct groups. 1) Retirees in Need (roughly 30%) Nearly one-third of Canadian retirees are living close to the edge. Limited pension income, modest personal savings, and rising living costs define their retirement. Adding to the pressure, retirement debt is becoming the new reality. According to Royal LePage, 29% of Canadians who are recently retired or approaching retirement expect to continue making mortgage payments on their primary residence. For many Canadians, debt has become a permanent companion, extending well into what should be their most financially secure years. Perhaps the most troubling reality is this. Most people in this group have never received professional financial advice. The Canadians who need planning the most are often the Canadians the financial planning industry reaches the least. That should concern every financial institution, advisor and policymaker in this country. When retirement arrives with too little income, too much debt and no plan, the result is not just financial stress. It is anxiety, reduced independence and difficult choices that no Canadian should have to make after a lifetime of work. 2) Retirees Seeking Stability (roughly 60%) This is the majority of Canadian retirees, and the group that the sailboat photo completely misses. They are not financially struggling, but neither are they financially free. They have enough to retire, but not enough to stop worrying. What they want is simple. They want to maintain the lifestyle they spent forty years building. They want confidence that their money will last as long as they do. They want a retirement plan that offers stability and predictability. And they want the freedom to help the people they love, whether that's contributing to a grandchild's education, helping with a first home, or lending a hand when life throws one of their children an unexpected curveball. That is where retirement becomes complicated. Retirement has changed dramatically over the past three decades, but much of the advice Canadians receive has not. The result is a growing gap between today's retirement realities and yesterday's retirement plans. Every dollar shared with family is one less dollar available to fund their own future. Every unexpected expense raises the same unsettling question: Will I still have enough? This group lives in the space between abundance and anxiety. They have assets, but not always confidence. They have choices, but every choice comes with trade-offs. They don't need a miracle. They need a plan that provides stability, predictability, and the confidence to enjoy the retirement they worked so hard to earn without constantly wondering if today's decisions will become tomorrow's regrets. 3) Affluent Retirees (roughly 10%) The remaining ten percent focuses on sophisticated wealth management: transferring wealth to the next generation, structuring estates to minimize taxes, and giving philanthropically. These are good problems to have, served by an entire industry built to solve them. And that's the uncomfortable truth hiding in the framework: most of our retirement advice, most of our products, and most of our planning tools were designed with this group in mind. Retirement Fear Has a Name In 1990, more than 70% of Canadian workplace pension plans were defined benefit plans, providing predictable, guaranteed lifetime income. By 2022, that figure had fallen to just 37%. In the span of a single working generation, we quietly shifted the risk of outliving retirement savings from institutions to individuals. The anxiety created by that shift is something I encountered in thousands of conversations with Canadians throughout my lending career, long before I had a name for it. I call it FORO, the Fear of Running Out. In the EY report, we describe it this way: "Fear of running out (FORO) reflects a structural gap in retirement system design, not a failure of individual planning. Most retirement frameworks were built for accumulation rather than sustainable income in later life." That is the heart of the challenge. Canada's retirement system does an excellent job of helping people save, but far less to help them transform those savings into sustainable, predictable income throughout retirement. It is little wonder that so many Canadians approach retirement with uncertainty rather than confidence. The Elephant in the Living Room One final reality deserves far more attention. Canada is in the midst of one of the largest intergenerational wealth transfers in its history. Much of that wealth is tied up in residential real estate, owned by Canadians who consistently say they want to remain in their homes for as long as possible. That creates an important contradiction. The largest asset held by most Canadian households is also one of the least integrated into mainstream retirement planning. We encourage Canadians to build home equity for decades, then often ignore it when they need income the most. If retirement planning is meant to consider every available resource, why do we continue to overlook the largest one? Resolving that question has become the focus of my research and my forthcoming book, Your Retirement Reset: How to Convert Home Equity into Financial Security (ECW Press, September 2026). But that discussion extends beyond the scope of this article. For now, it is enough to recognize the disconnect. Retirement has changed. Canadians' balance sheets have changed. It may be time for retirement planning to change as well. A Retirement System Designed for Everyone The EY report reminds us that retirement is more than a financial milestone. It is one of life's most significant transitions, and every Canadian deserves to approach it with confidence, dignity and choice. That outcome will not be achieved with a retirement system designed around a single, hypothetical retiree. Canadians retire with different financial realities, different goals and different challenges. A retirement system that recognizes only one path will continue to leave too many people behind. Designing for the three retirement realities outlined in this paper is not simply good policy. It is good business. Financial institutions that tailor products, advice and education to meet the needs of all three groups will be better positioned to serve Canada's fastest-growing demographic. Policymakers who encourage that evolution will help create a retirement system that reflects the way Canadians actually live today, not the way they lived thirty years ago. The question is no longer whether retirement has changed. It has. The question is whether our retirement system will evolve quickly enough to meet Canadians where they are. Don't Retire... Re-Wire! Sue

Op-Ed: Crypto market bill adds risk, not clarity

Markets function best when participants understand the rules of the road, investors have confidence in the integrity of the system, and regulators have clear authority to police misconduct. The crypto market structure legislation now advancing in Congress promises exactly this clarity. Yet it raises a more troubling question: what happens when legislation written to create clarity instead exempts large parts of the digital asset ecosystem from the very safeguards that make markets safe for everyday Americans? Blockchain technology, tokenization, stablecoins and digital assets can improve efficiency, lower transaction costs, and widen access to financial products. Those opportunities are real. But sustainable innovation requires trust, and trust requires accountability. The legislation under consideration would create broad carve-outs for parts of the digital asset ecosystem, particularly within decentralized finance. Supporters call these provisions pro-innovation. Economically, they are regulatory arbitrage–the practice of avoiding rules and requirements that apply to similar financial activities elsewhere. Regulatory arbitrage does not create better products or services. Instead, it allows some firms to operate with lower costs by avoiding obligations designed to protect consumers and maintain financial stability. When two companies provide the same financial service but follow different sets of rules, the company with fewer requirements will naturally have lower costs. Those savings are not necessarily the result of greater efficiency. They often come from avoiding safeguards that other firms are required to maintain. Consider what the exemptions waive. A bank that holds customer assets must keep those assets separate from their own funds, maintain capital reserves, and fund a supervisory and compliance apparatus. An exempt digital platform performing the same custodial function carries none of these costs, so it can offer the service more cheaply while taking on risks that may not become apparent until problems arise. A bank that pays a return on deposits also pays deposit insurance premiums, holds regulatory capital, and absorbs the cost of anti-money-laundering compliance. An exempt platform passing through the yield on its reserves bears none of these and can therefore advertise a higher net rate on funds that are, economically, deposits. The activity is the same on both sides of the ledger. Only the rulebook differs, and the rulebook is the cost. This asymmetry falls hardest on community banks. Their deposits are the raw material of local lending. When an exempt platform can out-price them on stablecoin yield without carrying the costs that yield is meant to cover, deposits migrate, funding costs rise, and lending capacity contracts. As a result, community banks have less money available to lend, which can make it harder for small businesses to access credit. Community banks are responsible for roughly 60% of small-business loans and 80% of agricultural lending nationwide[1]. In Louisiana, where local banks finance small businesses and family farms, that risk is especially acute. The lesson is straightforward: when economically similar activities–like stablecoin yield and interest payments–operate under very different rules, risk often becomes harder to see until it's too late. History shows where this leads. Before the 2008 crisis, mortgage-related risk migrated out of regulated banks and into the “shadow banking” system–financial entities and investment vehicles that operated with less oversight. Those markets looked innovative and efficient. But because transparency and accountability were weaker, risk accumulated out of sight until it threatened the entire system. The lesson is not that the instruments were novel. It is that economically similar activities were governed by different rules, and risk flowed to the corner where it was hardest to see. The same logic applies to investors. Markets succeed only when participants trust them, which is why registration requirements promote transparency, best-execution standards help ensure fair treatment, and anti-money-laundering tools deter illicit activity. The legislation would let certain digital asset developers operate outside many of these protections. Technology can change how an asset is recorded or transferred. It does not change the risks an investor bears, or the incentives a firm faces when no one is watching. The United States does need a durable framework for digital assets, and regulatory uncertainty serves no one. Entrepreneurs need predictable rules, investors need confidence, and markets need consistency. But a framework built on exemptions delivers none of these. It delivers a two-tier market in which the regulated bear the costs and the exempt reap the advantages, until the risks they shed reassemble somewhere less visible. The most durable financial innovations in American history emerged within systems that paired opportunity with accountability. Digital assets should be no exception. Congress should reject this legislation and pursue a framework that applies the same rules to the same activities. Innovation matters. Trust is what makes it last.