Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

Here’s a fun twist you might not expect: a recent study shows that most people can't tell if a poem was crafted by a human or AI — and even more surprising, we often prefer the AI versions! Researchers Brian Porter and Edouard Machery from the University of Pittsburgh put this theory to the test, and the results reveal something pretty quirky about our poetic tastes. <h2>Human or AI? You decide!</h2>For this experiment, Porter and Machery recruited over 1,600 participants and gave them a batch of <keyword id="6355263" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="poetry" source="Orion">poetry</keyword> to read. Each participant got ten poems, five written by legendary poets like William Shakespeare, Emily Dickinson, Lord Byron, and T.S. Eliot, and five crafted by ChatGPT-3.5 mimicking these poets’ styles. Participants had no idea which ones were real and which were AI. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="115273975" title="5 interesting takeaways from Slack&amp;#39;s survey of 17,000 desk workers about AI" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>The shocker was that readers were more likely to think the AI poems were written by humans! In fact, the poems people thought least likely to be human were often written by the very poets we’d consider masters of the craft. <h2>What makes a poem feel "real"?</h2>Curious to dive deeper, the researchers set up a second experiment with 696 new participants. This time, each reader rated poems on things like beauty, emotion, rhythm, and originality. The readers were divided into three groups: some were told the poems were written by humans, others by AI, and a third group got no information at all. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="115299674" title="Instead of killing jobs, there&amp;#39;s a strange AI hiring boom happening, according to Marc Andreessen" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>They found that if you tell someone a poem was AI-generated, they’re likely to rate it lower on just about every quality. But here’s the twist: when people didn’t know who wrote the poems, they often rated the AI-generated ones higher than the human written ones! <h2>So, why are we falling for AI poetry?</h2>Turns out, AI poems often end up being a little more straightforward and easy to enjoy, while poems by famous poets can be more complex and challenging. Instead of appreciating the depth of a classic poet’s work, readers sometimes mistake complexity for confusion and move on. <keyword id="23985627" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="AI-generated-poems" source="keywords">AI-generated poems</keyword>, meanwhile, serve up their message in a style that feels familiar and easy to “get,” making them more enjoyable at first glance. Basically, we tend to believe we’ll prefer human poetry. But in reality, AI’s smooth style is just easier to like — and we interpret this as a sign the poem was created by a human. The findings of this research have been published in Scientific Reports and can be accessed <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-76900-1">here</a>.

New study finds readers can’t tell AI poems from human ones — and they often prefer AI

London: Universities and student groups on Tuesday urgently lobbied British Prime Minister <keyword id="19906889" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rishi-Sunak" source="keywords">Rishi Sunak</keyword> to safeguard the country's <keyword id="21659184" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="post-study-visa" source="keywords">post-study visa</keyword> offer, which has been dominated by Indians to gain work experience for around two years at the end of their university degree. Amid reports that Sunak is considering either restricting or ending the <keyword id="20616105" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Graduate-Route" source="keywords">Graduate Route</keyword> to curtail soaring migration statistics ahead of a general election, a group of nearly 30 university vice-chancellors and the <keyword id="21760521" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="national-indian-students-and-alumni-association" source="keywords">National Indian Students and Alumni Association</keyword> (NISAU) UK have issued detailed letters of appeal to 10 Downing Street. They list a series of factors in favour of keeping the Graduate visa scheme unchanged, including the benefits that international students bring to the UK economy in a competitive global higher education marketplace. "Modelling by consultancy London Economics shows that a single cohort has a net economic benefit of GBP 37 billion to the UK economy; as well as through the soft power that Britain's international graduates generate for the country over time, including through furthering ties of trade and diplomacy," reads the NISAU UK letter addressed to Sunak. "Indeed, 70 per cent of <keyword id="19971660" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Indian-students" source="keywords">Indian students</keyword> have told us that the ability to gain meaningful work experience is a critical element in their decision to choose between competing international destinations, of which the UK is one... the Graduate Route allows the opportunity to gain this work experience for a temporary period. It is non-extendable and does not count towards permanent settlement. This means that neither students nor Graduate visa holders should be considered 'immigrants' in the context of the long-term picture of migration," it notes. Their appeal comes a week after the influential <keyword id="20609895" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Migration-Advisory-Committee" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Migration Advisory Committee" meta.hostid="83" meta.entityid="Migration Advisory Committee">Migration Advisory Committee</keyword> (MAC) advised the government to let the scheme continue as it found no abuse of this post-study work offer. It also confirmed that Indians topped its tally, accounting for 89,200 visas between 2021 and 2023, or 42 per cent of the overall grants, and were likely to be "most affected by any restriction on the Graduate Route". In their letter to Sunak, universities in the north of England — from Sunderland to Sheffield, Leeds to Lancaster, Liverpool to Teesside, Bradford to Huddersfield, and York to Newcastle — said they will all be harmed by the removal or reduction of this visa as it is an "intrinsic part of the educational offer that has made the UK so attractive to brilliant students from all around the world". "The Graduate Visa Route is regarded by students in key markets like India as an integral part of their educational experience. The MAC review made clear that the removal of this route would make the UK less attractive and thus would cause considerable financial detriment to universities around the country," reads their joint letter. "International student tuition fee income has long cross-subsidised underfunded research and has increasingly become critical to cross-subsidise the teaching of UK undergraduate students because of the frozen tuition fee. Universities cannot continue to absorb the costs of teaching UK undergraduates without some form of alternative funding source," they caution. On top of their visa fees, international students who find work and start businesses contribute billions of pounds in income tax, national insurance and VAT annually. The university chiefs point out that they are also usually net contributors to the National Health Service (NHS) through the NHS surcharge. The Russell Group of the UK's leading universities issued its appeal over the weekend, with CEO Tim Bradshaw warning that there has already been a 10 per cent decline in international applications for post-graduate courses starting this September in the wake of the clampdown on students being able to bring dependant family members. "A further restriction on international students would not only be unnecessary — as numbers are already falling — but also damaging, resulting in less spending in local communities, fewer opportunities for domestic students and less UK research," he noted in a letter to Sunak. Members of his own Cabinet are believed to be opposed to any changes to the Graduate scheme, but the British Prime Minister is having to balance pressures from the right of the governing Conservatives who are single-minded in their demands to curb all forms of legal as well as illegal migration levels ahead of an election later this year.

Universities, student groups lobby PM Sunak to keep UK's post-study visa scheme unchanged

Smartphones have changed how we connect, work, and entertain ourselves, but they might also be silently reshaping our closest relationships. A recent study titled ‘Impact of Smartphones on Parent-Child Relationships’ sheds light on a growing concern: the excessive use of smartphones is creating barriers between parents and children in India. The sixth edition of the vivo Switch Off survey, conducted in collaboration with CyberMedia Research (CMR), highlights how technology, while indispensable, has become a source of conflict in family dynamics. The findings are a stark reminder of the need for balance in a world increasingly dominated by screens. <h2>Children are more aware of smartphone impact </h2> One surprising revelation from the study is that children appear more aware of the negative impact of <keyword id="24400365" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="excessive-smartphone-use" source="keywords">excessive smartphone use</keyword> than their parents. About 69% of children acknowledged that smartphone overuse has led to conflicts with their parents, and an overwhelming 94% suggested that their ideal phone for parents should focus on basic features like calling, messaging, and a camera—stripping away apps for entertainment, gaming, or social media. Children also demonstrated a desire for collective change: 66% said they would give up social media if their peers did the same, while over 90% wished that some popular social media platforms had never been created. <h2>Parents spend more time on their phones than children </h2> While 75% of parents worry about their children’s ability to build meaningful relationships, the irony is evident. Many parents overlook how their own smartphone habits are affecting their bond with their kids. On average, parents spend more than five hours daily on their phones, compared to four hours for children. A striking 73% of parents admit that their device use has caused friction at home. Even during significant moments like family vacations or celebrations, both groups confess to using their phones, underscoring how deeply ingrained this habit has become. <h2>Yearning for stronger bonds </h2> Despite the challenges, there’s a shared longing for deeper connections. About 76% of children and 84% of parents expressed a wish to strengthen their relationships through meaningful family time, free from digital distractions. Both groups are exploring solutions such as creating “phone-free” zones at home and setting mutual screen-time limits. One-third of children believe the world would be better off without certain apps, reflecting their frustration with the digital environment they’ve grown up in. Yet, they also see hope in collective action—if their families and friends embrace healthier smartphone habits, they’re ready to follow suit. <h2>Expert opinion </h2> Highlighting the issue, Riddhi Doshi Patel, a child psychologist and parenting counsellor, noted, “Excessive smartphone use is silently eroding emotional bonds between parents and children. Campaigns promoting mindful tech use aren’t just helpful; they’re transformative. They can foster genuine connection and create homes where relationships flourish beyond screens.” To address these challenges, vivo has collaborated with experts like Catherine Price, author of How to Break Up with Your Phone, and Riddhi Doshi Patel to offer practical advice. Their guidance includes actionable steps like setting screen-time boundaries, creating phone-free zones, and prioritising face-to-face interactions. What are your thoughts on this growing issue? Can families bridge the digital divide, or is it a price we’ll continue to pay for staying connected?

Parents spend more time on their smartphones than children and this might be straining relationships, new study suggests

A bartender at a high-end restaurant in south Brooklyn, Alessia Gonzalez doesn't feel free to speak her mind at work, at least on political issues. The neighborhood, Bay Ridge, is a Republican stronghold, and customers are often decked out in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-madison-square-garden-rally-overshadow-economy-puerto-rico-2024-10">MAGA</a> hats.Gonzalez, 27, says that if she were to discuss her political views, particularly her belief that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-says-killed-hamas-chief-yahya-sinwar-oct-7-mastermind-2024-10">Gaza</a>, she'd be judged by coworkers and customers or face even worse consequences. "I feel like I could be fired," she says.When politics comes up at work, Gonzalez stays mum. "I feel the need to sort of put on a mask and not necessarily agree with them or show them any kind of support, but at the same time not express my own opinion so that I don't make anyone uncomfortable or make anyone look at me differently," she says.Fernando, a 30-year-old from Colombia who works in advertising in New York, is far more <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/american-republicans-in-israel-mobilizing-expat-vote-for-trump-2024-10">supportive of Israel</a>, and he too withholds his views of the conflict around his coworkers. He worries that one colleague, who is outspoken in her opposition to Israel's treatment of Palestinians, would have more questions than he's willing or prepared to answer. "I don't say anything about it, because my thoughts are sometimes very opposite," says Fernando, who asked for partial anonymity to protect his relationships.Withholding one's real views, or what public-opinion researchers call "self-silencing," appears to be widespread in the US. As part of a <a target="_blank" href="https://populace.org/research">new study</a>, the think tank Populace and the research firm YouGov conducted a survey in the US in which 58% of respondents said they thought most people don't feel comfortable expressing their honest opinions about sensitive issues and 61% said that in the past year they themselves had "avoided saying things that they believe because others might find them offensive." The study, "Social Pressure Index: Private Opinion in America," of more than 19,000 respondents found evidence that a majority of all demographic groups — age, gender, race, income, and political party — had self-silenced in the past year."Social norms have made it costly to express views that one considers to be controversial, and therefore people withhold those views," says James Gibson, a professor of government at Washington University in St. Louis who's studied public opinion for more than 40 years and was not involved in Populace's study.Not everyone agrees that all private views, regardless of how objectionable they are, should be voiced in the public square or even at home. The old saying "no politics at the dinner table" seems to have existed since there have been politics to talk about at dinner tables. Pushing certain views that violate basic social norms out of the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/discourse">discourse</a> can be a powerful form of accountability and a way to shape public debate for the better. But critics of self-censorship argue that when too many people aren't saying what they actually think, it inhibits the vigorous public debate necessary for a healthy society. "If people are self-censoring, deliberation is compromised and that's very, very damaging, in my view, to democracy," Gibson says. The study found that the more people self-silence, the less they trust other people.In the final sprint of another bilious and barbed US presidential election season, where the final polls show Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in a deadlock, it's clear the country is deeply divided. Public-opinion experts say polarization perpetuates self-censorship by creating an environment where the perceived costs of dissent are higher. "Your brain assumes the loudest voices repeated the most are the majority," said Todd Rose, the CEO of Populace and a former professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Education. People fear repercussions for expressing opinions that differ from what they perceive to be the majority viewpoint. In turn, dishonest public debate makes us believe that we're more divided than we really are."Self-silencing can lead to a lot more than just saying nothing," Rose said. "It can end up leading to this place where public consensus looks very different than private consensus."But the more we know about what we actually believe, the likelier we may be to meet in the middle.America seems to be suffering from what the German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann coined in the 1970s as a "<a target="_blank" href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228049403_The_Spiral_of_Silence_A_Theory_of_Public_Opinion">spiral of silence</a>." Noelle-Neumann argued that people are reluctant to share their opinions on controversial topics when they subconsciously perceive that the majority disagrees with them. As a result, majority views come to be seen as dominant over time, shrinking room for conversation and compromise.In reality, we very well might agree on a lot more than we admit to today. To try to measure people's private views, the Populace researchers used what's called the list-experiment method. This involved dividing respondents into two groups. One was presented a series of lists each containing three statements (e.g., "Class size significantly affects student achievement"). The other was presented with a series of identical lists but with a fourth statement added — these extra statements were the ones that the researchers were actually interested in testing (e.g., "I support school choice in public education"). For each list, respondents were asked how many of the statements they agreed with, an indirect line of questioning meant to encourage honest responses. The researchers could then compare the two groups' answers to estimate how many people actually agreed with the statements being tested. Finally, the researchers conducted a separate, "public" survey in which a different set of people were asked directly whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements being tested.Take abortion, as one example. Populace found that Protestant, Roman Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim respondents in the list experiment were all more likely than comparable respondents in the public survey to support the idea that "abortion should be legal in most cases." While just 39% of Protestants in the traditional survey agreed with that statement, Populace estimated that 54% agreed in the private structure. Among Muslims, the difference was 43% agreeing with the statement versus an estimated 66% who privately agreed. Overall, Populace found that 55% of respondents publicly said abortion should be legal in most cases, compared with 63% thought to have privately agreed. (Both figures were far higher than those in polling from <a target="_blank" href="https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/05/PP_2024.5.13_abortion_TOPLINE.pdf">Pew</a> and <a target="_blank" href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/321143/americans-stand-abortion.aspx">Gallup</a>, which included question wording with a wider range of possible responses than the agree-disagree format of the Populace study.)Democrats and Republicans were also more privately aligned on the question of defunding the police. While 27% of Democratic respondents publicly agreed with the statement "I support defunding the police," just 3% privately supported the movement. At the same time, just 1% of Republicans privately supported it and 6% publicly supported it.The survey also found that Republicans and wealthier people were more likely to privately feel that society isn't fair than they publicly acknowledged. Rose posited that Democrats tend to be more publicly concerned with unfairness, particularly when it comes to marginalized groups. Republicans define themselves in opposition to that. That dynamic is on display in this election as, for example, former Trump attacks Harris for defending a federal law that permits government-funded gender-affirming healthcare for prisoners and migrants. But privately, they acknowledged that they agree. While 50% of Republicans publicly said "we live in a mostly fair society," just 11% privately agreed.Another thing liberals and conservatives might secretly agree on: that they don't trust the government, at all. Democrats were far more likely to differ in their private and public responses on this: While 36% publicly agreed with the statement "In general, I trust the government to tell me the truth," just 5% were estimated to have privately agreed. Similarly, 2% of Republicans were thought to privately trust the government to tell the truth, while 14% said so publicly. Other surveys have <a target="_blank" href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2015/11/23/1-trust-in-government-1958-2015/">similarly found</a> historically low levels of trust in major institutions like the government and the media across the political spectrum.Rose is particularly concerned about low levels of trust — of the government, the media, and other people. A lack of social trust causes people to resent each other, look for scapegoats, and become susceptible to demagoguery, he said. "By almost any measure, social trust is a phenomenal predictor of the health and vibrancy of democracies," Rose says.Not everyone is convinced that American society is suffering from a complete breakdown in societal trust. Gibson argues the long-established survey measure of whether we trust each other — agreement with the statement that "in general, most people can be trusted" — is too vague to be accurate. "You've got to build in some context to let people know what the question is. You can't allow their imagination just to go crazy."Overall, certain groups — including Gen Zers, political independents, and college graduates — were more likely to produce dramatically different results in the public and private surveys, Populace found. Gibson speculated that this might be because these groups tend to be more aware of social norms, and sensitive to the costs of violating them.Gen Zers, 72% of whom said they had self-silenced in the past year, might be influenced by their heavy use of social media, which "makes it very easy to manufacture false consensus," Rose argues. They also have a particularly keen awareness of being harassed or canceled for voicing unpopular opinions. For wealthier and more-educated people, the costs of offending customers, an audience, a fellow country-club member, or a business partner might be higher. "In a society where reputation matters a lot, in an attention economy, there's actually a lot more incentive to hold views that are consistent with what you think people want to hear," Rose says. The risks of social ostracism might not be as acute for lower-income people and those with less education, as they're often already socially and economically excluded. And ironically, the Silent Generation (born from 1928 to 1945) reported self-silencing the least.Engaging in public debate or even just a dinner-table discussion can be contentious and uncomfortable. But Rose and Gibson argue that the only way to build a less polarized and self-censoring society is through hard conversations."As we start to find the moral courage to be honest with each other, respectfully," Rose says, "I think you're going to see the revealing of a common ground that we can start to anchor in and start to try to solve some of the real problems we face as a country."That revelation, however, will have to wait until after Election Day.<a target="_blank" rel="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/author/eliza-relman">Eliza Relman</a> is a policy correspondent focused on housing, transportation, and infrastructure on Insider's economy team.

A new study shows that Americans secretly agree on more than they admit

Incidence of stroke and related deaths are rising substantially around the world, with <keyword id="19900550" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="air-pollution" source="keywords">air pollution</keyword>, <keyword id="21334318" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="high-temperatures" source="keywords">high temperatures</keyword> and metabolic risk factors such as high blood pressure and physical inactivity, driving these increases, according to estimates published in The Lancet Neurology journal. Researchers found that the contribution of high temperatures to poor health and early death due to stroke has increased 72% since 1990 and is likely to continue increasing in the future, thereby highlighting how environmental factors can impact growing stroke burden. Further, for the first time, particulate matter or PM air pollution was found to have the same contribution as smoking towards causing a fatal form of brain bleed, according to the researchers forming the <keyword id="20691740" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Global-Burden-of-Disease" source="keywords">Global Burden of Disease</keyword>, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) group. The GBD study, the "largest and most comprehensive effort to quantify health loss across places and over time", is coordinated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), University of Washington, US. Globally, the number of people experiencing a stroke for the first time rose to 119 lakh in 2021 -- up by 70% since 1990 -- while deaths related to stroke rose to 73 lakh, which was up by 44% since 1990, making the neurological condition the third leading cause of death after ischaemic heart disease (short supply of blood to heart) and COVID-19. They added that over three-fourth of those affected by strokes live in low- and middle-income countries. According to lead author Valery L. Feigin from Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand, the rapid growth in the number of people affected by stroke strongly suggested that <keyword id="23228151" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="stroke-prevention" source="keywords">stroke prevention</keyword> strategies currently used are not sufficiently effective. "New, proven effective population-wide and motivational individual prevention strategies that could be applied to all people at risk of having a stroke, regardless of the level of risk, as recommended in the recent Lancet Neurology Commission on Stroke should be implemented across the globe urgently," said Feigin. The researchers also estimated that stroke-related liabilities attributable to 23 modifiable risk factors, including air pollution, excess body weight, high blood pressure, smoking and physical inactivity, increased from 100 million years of healthy life lost in 1990 to 135 million in 2021. These risk factors are present in huge numbers in Eastern Europe, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, they said. The authors also acknowledged substantial progress made in reducing the global stroke burden from risk factors linked to poor diet, air pollution and smoking. Poor health resulting from diets high in processed meat and low in vegetables declined by 40 % and 30%, respectively, while that due to PM air pollution and smoking fell by 20 % and 13%, respectively, they found. The results suggested that strategies for reducing exposure to these risk factors over the past three decades such as clean air zones and public smoking bans have been successful, the authors said. They called for implementing and monitoring the evidence-based recommendations set out in the 2023 World Stroke Organization-Lancet Neurology Commission on stroke for drastically reducing the global burden of stroke in the years to come and improving brain health and overall well-being of millions of people around the world. The recommendations include stroke surveillance programmes that monitor indicators of stroke such as incidence, recurrence, death rates and risk factors in a country, and care and rehabilitation services for people affected by stroke.

Stroke cases increasing globally, air pollution, high temperatures driving numbers, notes Lancet Study

<ul class="summary-list"><li>My 8-year-old loves Lego blocks and has been asking for years to go to <keyword id="23618278" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Legoland" source="keywords">Legoland</keyword>.</li><li>As a <keyword id="21623863" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="single-mom" source="keywords">single mom</keyword>, finances can be tight, and I needed to figure out how to make it happen.</li></ul>For years, my 8-year-old son has said he wants to be a <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lego-master-builders-life-size-sculptures-2016-7">master builder for The Lego Group</a>. So many of our bedtime stories were about Legoland, and I wanted to take him there as badly as he wanted to visit. It reminded me of visiting SeaWorld as a teenager and being inspired to study marine biology. However, as a <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/having-cleaning-person-takes-up-budget-but-its-worth-it-2022-4">single mom, finances can be tight</a>, and I knew it would take some strategic planning and scrimping to make the trip happen. Although some parents are willing to go into debt for their dream vacations, I'm not. I've always valued experiences over material things, but not if it breaks the bank. <h2>We created a budget for our trip</h2>In the weeks leading up to our trip, I asked my son to help create our itinerary with one activity per day. The highlight of the weeklong <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/los-angeles-kid-friendly-city-travel-guide-2024-8">vacation would be Legoland</a>, and we put together a list of attractions in the San Diego area that ranged from free options like the beach or low-cost museum visits to the pricier attractions. As I worked on the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-dont-pay-for-accommodations-traveling-trusted-housesitters-review-2024">big-picture budget</a>, I also helped my son create his own. He had been really excited to hear a friend describe how his savings account grew money over time. So when we sold his bike for $80 early in the summer, I set the money aside in my high-yield savings account for his spending money. As for the trip itself, there were a few things I could take advantage of. I was able to cash in a couple of bonds that my grandfather purchased for me decades ago, I had <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-start-collecting-air-miles-2017-9">air miles I could use for the short trip</a> from Oregon to California, and we had access to a family timeshare. Had we not had some help with these expenses, I likely would have shortened the trip or continued saving for another year. I focused on finding deals for the rental car, food, and attractions and saved in those areas by visiting mid-week and buying tickets that included meals. My one splurge was an <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/legoland-new-york-resort-hotel-family-review-2023-10">overnight stay at the Legoland hotel</a>, which was completely worth it when I saw my son's smile as we walked into our Ninjago-themed room and played with the Lego bricks in the pool. <h2>We talked about how much money we had to spend each day</h2>We <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/things-new-yorker-found-surprising-about-visiting-california-photos-2021-12">landed in San Diego</a> early Monday afternoon, dropped off our bags, and headed to Trader Joe's to grab snacks and breakfast fixings for the week. My son was amazed by everything he saw — the palm trees, the playground we spotted across the street, and our big studio room. I thought back to the many trips I'd taken over the years while enjoying seeing the city through his eyes. My son had a nice sum to spend during the week. He'd been saving his allowance, and I matched the proceeds from the sale of his bike. He had earned a meager amount of interest in the savings account, and we talked about how, had the money stayed in the account longer, he would have earned more. He wanted a $150 Lego set at Legoland, so he knew he had limited funds to spend elsewhere. At the start of each day, we discussed how much he had to spend, and then he carefully made a decision at each attraction. Despite this, there were some additional requests for me to buy things, and although I stayed firm on most, I did give in to some, like Ninjago pajamas, which he needed anyway. He loved wearing them around the park the next day. Every place we went had souvenir penny machines. I've collected these since I was a kid and was excited when Noah asked to get them, happily contributing the 50 cents or a dollar it took for the little memento. I stood behind him and thought about which imprint I'd choose as he carefully picked his own, like the Komodo dragon at the San Diego Zoo or the dolphins at SeaWorld. <h2>We slowed down and enjoyed free things</h2>As our energy decreased in the waning days of our trip, we slowed down. At first, I'd really wanted to maximize our time and take in all that we could, hoping to "get our money's worth," but by Friday, we needed a break. A late start wouldn't hurt our visit to SeaWorld, which was open until 8 p.m. We hung out in our studio, eating breakfast and lunch there before heading out. It was a nice reminder that vacation doesn't always have to be about seeing and doing everything; it can also be about relaxing. We spent our last day with friends, enjoying a hike overlooking La Jolla and eventually moving closer to the beach to watch the waves and sea lions. Our activity that day was another beautiful reminder that nature is free and entertaining in its own right. In the days following the trip, I felt exhausted by the daily money decisions yet relieved and satisfied that I navigated them. Creating meaningful moments doesn't require going into debt; instead, it can be about intention and focus on what's important. My son will never know how much I spent on that trip. What he'll remember is seeing the panda at the San Diego Zoo and driving the cars at Legoland. And that's exactly what I want him to remember. Deborah Goldstein is a philanthropy advisor focused on supporting philanthropists on their giving journey. In her spare time she's working on a memoir about the meaningful moments of life.

As a single mom, finances can be tight. Taking my son to Legoland was a good way to teach him about money.  

Refutational approaches are more effective in combating <keyword id="22910037" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="science-misinformation" source="keywords">science misinformation</keyword> rather than just stating <keyword id="20008110" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="facts" source="keywords">facts</keyword>, according to a study. <keyword id="19985687" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="researchers" source="keywords">Researchers</keyword> found that among 152 college <keyword id="19929042" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="students" source="keywords">students</keyword> exposed to <keyword id="19933162" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="misinformation" source="keywords">misinformation</keyword>, those who read an article purely carrying facts retained more misconceptions than those who read an article with a refutation. The findings are published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching. "Refutational approaches seem to work really well. While it's always best to get out in front as a teacher or communicator, students have smartphones. They're going to run into misinformation quickly. If we take this refutational approach, we're more likely to overcome misinformation," lead author Robert Danielson, a Washington State University educational psychology researcher, said. For the study, the researchers first tested what the student participants knew about putting fluoride in water. The students then read two articles: one with false <keyword id="19912556" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="information" source="keywords">information</keyword> saying that fluoridation is harmful and another presenting the scientific consensus that has found fluoridation is safe and prevents dental disease. The participants all read the same misinformation text, but different groups read an article with the correct information either in a traditional stating-the-facts style or one that first refuted the misinformation, before presenting the facts. The researchers also tested the effects of having the participants read the correct article before, or after, the misinformation. The results revealed that the students learned in all four situations. However, the group that saw the misinformation first, followed by mere facts, performed the worst, the researchers found. Those who had read the refutation article either before, or after, the misinformation had fewer misconceptions. They also had more positive emotions toward the subject, the authors found. "Our findings indicate that reading refutation texts led to significantly fewer misconceptions and reduced negative emotions," the authors wrote. With a profusion of information easily available on the internet, it can be hard for many people to sort fact from falsehood. This can cause a problem which the researchers call "conceptual contamination" -- when <keyword id="20016330" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="learning" source="keywords">learning</keyword> incorrect information interferes with learning the correct information. "Your mind doesn't discriminate for content. Whether it's a correct conception or a misconception, it just kind of absorbs it all," Danielson said. "People can learn misconceptions pretty easily, and there's no shortage of that <keyword id="20012499" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="online" source="keywords">online</keyword>," Danielson said. In a meta-analysis of 76 educational studies, Danielson and his team found that the refutational approach works well for a wide range of topics - from noncontroversial issues in physics and chemistry to highly controversial ones, including climate change and evolution as well as genetically modified foods and vaccines. The analysis was recently published in the journal Educational Psychologist.

Just stating facts may not be enough to overcome misinformation: Study

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Most US millionaires don't consider themselves rich, according to a new study.</li><li>There are about 5.5 million Americans with more than $1 million in investable assets in the US.</li></ul>The majority of <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/millionaire-age-millennials-inheriting-wealth-older-boomers-living-longer-2024-6">US millionaires</a> don't consider themselves to be "wealthy," according to a new study.<a target="_blank" class="" href="https://news.northwesternmutual.com/2024-09-04-Only-One-in-Three-American-Millionaires-Feel-Wealthy-and-Nearly-Half-Say-Their-Financial-Planning-Needs-Improvement,-According-to-Northwestern-Mutual-Planning-Progress-Study">Northwestern Mutual's 2024 Planning and Progress Study</a>, conducted by The Harris Poll, surveyed 4,588 US adults between January 3 and 17, 2024, and found that only 32% of Americans with more than $1 million in investable assets consider themselves "wealthy."The remaining two-thirds do not.Additionally, it found that almost half — 48% — of the high-net-worth individuals surveyed believed their <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/investing/financial-plan">financial plans</a> needed improving.Although the study found that most <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/who-are-americas-millionaires-white-gen-xers-boomers-educated-stocks-2024-1">American millionaires</a> don't feel wealthy, they did express greater feelings of financial clarity and preparedness compared to other groups.According to the study, 78% of millionaires considered themselves to be disciplined <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/financial-planner-tell-my-clients-focus-2024-04">financial planners</a>, compared to 45% of the general public, and 84% said they had <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/break-money-rules-financial-planner-stick-to-one-2024-5">long-term financial plans</a> that accounted for economic fluctuations, versus just 54% of the general public.The study also found that most US millionaires— 87% — anticipated being <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/investing/retirement-planning">"financially prepared" for retirement,</a> whereas only 54% of the general public felt the same."For most Americans, 'feeling like a million bucks' is less about believing you're rich and more about exuding confidence and clarity about the future," said John Roberts, chief field officer at Northwestern Mutual, in a press release.He continued: "But for many millionaires, money alone doesn't create clarity — financial plans do."The study suggested that this sense of clarity and preparedness among high-net-worth individuals might be linked to who they consult for financial advice.It found that 69% of American millionaires <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/investing/how-to-find-financial-advisor">work with a financial advisor </a>— more than double the rate of the general public, where only 33% consult one.The study also found that 59% of these millionaires considered advisors their most trusted source of financial advice, compared to 33% of the general public."Many Americans have a high regard for the expert advice they receive from a financial professional, but for wealthy Americans, that trust is even more significant," Roberts said.According to <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.henleyglobal.com/newsroom/press-releases/usa-wealth-report-2024">Henley &amp; Partners USA Wealth Report 2024</a>, there are some 5.5 million high-net-worth individuals holding over $1 million in liquid investable assets in the US, making up about 37% of the world's millionaires.Based on these figures, about 2% of the US adult population qualifies as millionaires by this standard, though <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/us-got-500k-new-millionaires-last-year-ai-market-rebound-2024-6#:~:text=The%20US%20added%20half%20a%20million%20millionaires%20in%202023%20%E2%80%94%20more,also%20helped%2C%20the%20report%20said.">other estimates</a> put the proportion a bit higher.

Most US millionaires don't consider themselves 'wealthy,' study finds

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Fasting may lead to better blood sugar control and more fat loss, suggests a study on metabolic syndrome.</li><li>Evidence indicates that intermittent fasting helps you eat less without cutting calories.</li></ul>Eating all your meals and snacks in an eight- to 10-hour window each day may help you to lose weight and improve your blood sugar control, new research suggests.The findings, published September 30 in <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M24-0859 ">Annals of Internal Medicine</a>, add to a growing school of evidence that intermittent fasting has promising health benefits, particularly for people who want to tackle their metabolic health.<a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/intermittent-fasting-benefits-and-risks-for-longevity-weight-loss-cancer-2024-4">Intermittent fasting</a> is a hugely popular diet, often touted by celebrities, longevity influencers, and C-suite executives. The idea is that it's not just about what you eat, but when. Adherents limit all of their food intake to a specific window of time each day, which varies based on which style of fasting they follow.In the new study, people who fasted for three months lost more weight than those who didn't, and ate fewer calories without specifically trying to.Here's more detail:<h2 id="5e9cea79-ff4c-41d7-a500-5569ad7572e6">The study, explained</h2>A research team from the University of California San Diego School of Medicine and The Salk Institute wanted to test whether fasting could help people with <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/health/diet-nutrition/metabolic-syndrome-diet">metabolic syndrome</a>, a collection of risk factors for chronic illnesses. The condition includes <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/5-warning-signs-you-might-have-high-blood-sugar-doctors-2024-9">high blood sugar</a> as well as high levels of body fat, and increases the odds that someone will develop heart disease and diabetes.For three months, the researchers followed 108 adults with metabolic syndrome, in theirs 50s on average.Half of the participants were randomly assigned to follow their typical eating pattern, with some general nutrition advice about healthy eating, such as seeking inspiration from the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mediterrean-diet-healthiest-best-overall-2024-1">Mediterranean diet</a>.The other half were given the same advice, but were also instructed to limit their eating to eight to 10 hours a day, and tracked their eating on a smartphone app called myCircadianClock.By the end of the study, both groups lost a small amount of weight. However, participants who did intermittent fasting lost a bit more weight, and had a much bigger drop in their body fat percentage, since more of the weight they lost was fat instead of muscle.They also had significantly better blood sugar control and <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/health/treatments/how-to-lower-a1c">HbA1c</a>, a measure of average blood sugar over time that's used to screen for diabetes and prediabetes.<h2 id="ec8f7f48-08a1-475f-82cd-64683e60709a">Fasting works by helping you eat less, experts say</h2>The science behind fasting suggests it's effective because it helps you eat less.The fasting group in the newest study ate 350 fewer calories on average each day, according to the data, although they weren't specifically asked to cut calories. Most of that calorie reduction came from eating fewer carbohydrates and less fat. They ate about the same amount of protein.Previous evidence suggests that <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-protein-maximize-muscle-gains-2022-9">eating enough protein</a> can help maintain muscle during weight loss. That may explain why participants in this study held on to their muscle mass, while other research has found some kinds of fasting may have a <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/new-research-finds-intermittent-fasting-may-not-boost-weight-loss-2020-9">risk of muscle loss</a>.<h2 id="bda8f51e-0f31-4bbd-8c9d-fee50210382e">To get the benefits of fasting, stop eating at night</h2>Another potential benefit to fasting is that it helps you tap into your body's natural internal clock, known as circadian rhythm, <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/intermittent-fasting-benefits-and-risks-for-longevity-weight-loss-cancer-2024-4">Satchidananda Panda</a>, a pioneer in fasting research and co-author of the latest study, previously told Business Insider.Panda and other experts say the easiest way to start reap the benefits of fasting is to <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/protein-at-night-may-slow-digestion-researcher-says-2024-3">stop eating three hours before bed</a>.This simple 12-hour fast may boost your health and help cut down on <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/study-eating-at-night-linked-higher-calorie-intake-junk-food-2020-9">potential junk food snacking</a>, too.

To burn fat and improve blood sugar, try intermittent fasting, a new study says

Excess <keyword id="6373166" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="fat" source="Orion">fat</keyword> around the abdomen is related to more chances of experiencing widespread <keyword id="33229" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="chronic-pain" source="Orion">chronic pain</keyword>, especially in <keyword id="624" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="women" source="Orion">women</keyword>, according to a study. In over 32,000 participants from the UK Biobank dataset, researchers found that women having fat surrounding their abdominal organ, called 'visceral adipose tissue', were twice as likely to experience chronic <keyword id="27332" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="pain" source="Orion">pain</keyword> at multiple points in their body. About half the participants were women, aged 55 years on average. Chronic pain is a condition in which pain persists beyond the immediate healing period, following an injury or trauma. It can sometimes be widespread, felt in more than one part of the body. The researchers, including those from the <keyword id="21703969" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="university-of-tasmania" source="keywords">University of Tasmania</keyword>, Australia, also found that women having higher levels of 'subcutaneous adipose tissue', or the fat right under the skin that can be pinched, were at a 60% increased chance of having widespread chronic pain. The findings are published in the journal <keyword id="23125738" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="regional-anesthesia" source="keywords">Regional Anesthesia</keyword> and Pain Medicine. While excess fat in <keyword id="6364492" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="obesity" source="Orion">obesity</keyword> is known to be linked to pain in the muscles and bones, researchers said that the relationship between excess visceral and subcutaneous and widespread chronic pain has not been studied. Among the men studied, those having higher levels of visceral adipose tissue and subcutaneous adipose tissue were found to be at a 34% and a 39% higher chance of having widespread chronic pain, respectively. The stronger links between fat and chronic pain in women could be a result of how differently fat is distributed compared to men, along with hormonal differences. The researchers advised that addressing abdominal fat could help reduce chronic pain, particularly if it is widespread. For the study, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the abdomen were used for measuring both the types of fat -- visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue. The participants also underwent pain assessments, in which they were asked if they had experienced pain in their neck or shoulder, back, hip, knee or 'all over the body' for more than three months. The scans and evaluations were repeated after two years for a smaller group of 638 participants. Being an observational study, the authors could not establish cause-and-effect links. They also acknowledged the study's limitations, including the comparatively smaller size of the participants' sample undergoing repeat tests, and not measuring the severity of pain. "Abdominal adipose tissue was associated with chronic musculoskeletal pain, suggesting that excessive and ectopic (abnormal) fat depositions may be involved in the pathogenesis of multisite and widespread chronic musculoskeletal pain," the authors wrote.

Excess abdominal fat linked to widespread chronic pain in women, study finds

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Economists at the Peterson Institute studied what would happen if Trump undermined Fed independence.</li><li>They found that GDP would shrink, inflation would rise, and capital would flow to other countries.</li></ul>In August, Trump floated the idea that, as a successful businessman, he should have "at least" a say in the Federal Reserve's monetary policy.A new study by the Peterson Institute of International Economics, a renowned nonpartisan think tank, found that such an idea could have catastrophic economic consequences. The <a target="_blank" href="https://www.piie.com/sites/default/files/2024-09/wp24-20.pdf">study's lead researchers</a> dug into the economic impact of three of Trump's campaign promises: <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-mass-deportation-immigraiton-plan-federal-reserve-inflation-2024-9">mass deportations</a>, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/jared-golden-10-percent-tariff-bill-trump-2024-9">tariffs</a>, and eroding Fed independence.Throughout the course of a prospective Trump term, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-campaign-fed-independence-jerome-powell-interes-rates-politics-2024-4">undermining the central bank's independence</a> would lead to $304 billion in economic losses, the study found. While Trump has not specified exactly how he would interfere in the Fed, the researchers assumed he is successful and <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/interest-rate-cut-trump-fed-powell-reaction-independence-history-2024-9">pressured the bank to jack up economic growth</a> when conducting their study. They found that such action would result in lower GDP and higher inflation through 2040.Business Insider spoke with one of the study's authors, Warwick McKibbin, a senior fellow at PIIE. He said that initially, GDP and employment would rise, but that inflation and input costs would go up soon after. Eventually, capital would flow out of the US, causing the dollar to fall in value."It's like the party at the front and the hangover after four years," McKibbin said over the phone. He said that by 2028, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fed-rate-cuts-inflation-kamala-harris-election-impact-2024-9">inflation would be built into the system</a> at an additional 2% per year and the economy would shrink.Domestic producers would bear the brunt of the consequences due to rising input costs. As domestic goods get more expensive, workers' purchasing power would go down, McKibbin said. All the while, the researchers argue that investors would get spooked by the politicized Fed and start directing their capital to other countries starting around 2026. Production would shift to other parts of the world, including China, the study found."Ironically, it means the rest of the world gets this free lunch because all that capital that would have gone into building America's future growth will now get invested somewhere else, mainly Canada, Mexico, and China, as well as Australia," McKibbin told Business Insider. Though Trump promises an America First economic agenda, McKibbin said that taking control of the Fed would get him the opposite results.According to the study, the economy would hit a low point in 2028 and begin rebounding."But not back to where you were," McKibbin said.He said the capital stock would feel the impact for a long time, and full recovery could take decades.While Trump's specific ideas about the Fed remain murky, some of his allies are quietly drafting plans on how to strip the central bank of independence, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/trump-allies-federal-reserve-independence-54423c2f">the Wall Street Journal reported</a>. The 10-page manifesto apparently includes policy shifts and suggests the president should have a direct say over interest rates. Sources told the Journal the group thinks Trump should be able to fire Jerome Powell as Fed chair before his term ends in 2026.Trump hasn't publicly acknowledged the plans and his advisors said they're not endorsed by the campaign. McKibbin and his fellow researchers did not examine Vice President Kamala Harris' policies in the same way because, according to the paper, she has not "proposed any major departures from the Biden administration's policies and none with as significant international economic implications as Trump's."Still, McKibbin said he wishes there was more research on the subject. He doesn't think the public is paying enough attention to the risks of Trump's Fed proposals or the overall murkiness of the candidates' economic policy. Neither Trump nor <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-kamala-harris-opportunity-economy-2024-9">Harris</a> has shared much about how to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-harris-economy-tech-debate-tariffs-taxes-2024-9">enact their proposals</a> or their long-term economic impacts."If you're going to advocate a policy, there has to be evidence as to why you're advocating that policy," McKibbin said.The policy haziness persists even as the <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-us-economy-would-look-like-with-trump-biden-presidency-2024-5">economy is a top issue for many voters</a> and potentially the deciding issue in the election.

A researcher who studied Trump's plans to control the Fed said it could tank the economy

A new study analysing long-Covid among children and teenagers in the US has found that <keyword id="44308" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="symptoms" source="Orion">symptoms</keyword> differed between the two groups. While children faced more brain and stomach-related problems, teenagers experienced fatigue, <keyword id="950054" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Physical-Pain" source="Orion">physical pain</keyword>, and loss of smell and taste. Moreover, long-Covid symptoms common in both adults and teens were more than those between teens and children, highlighting the importance of age groups-based COVID-19 research, according to the team of over 140 researchers that conducted the study. Published in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the study is part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH)'s 'RECOVER' Initiative, aimed at understanding and preventing long-Covid, which refers to a set of persisting symptoms months after having COVID-19 <keyword id="6393040" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="infection" source="Orion">infection</keyword>. The researchers studied more than 5,300 children and adolescents, of whom about 3,860 -- - 751 children and 3109 adolescents -- had a history of the viral infection. Caregivers were surveyed for about 75 symptoms that occurred at least 90 days after an initial COVID-19 infection and lasted for at least a month. They were also enquired about their child's overall health and quality of life. Among children aged 6-11 years, the most common long <keyword id="8764262" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Covid" source="Orion">COVID</keyword> symptoms were headache (57%), followed by trouble with memory/focusing, trouble sleeping (44 %) and stomach pain (43 %), the study found. Among the adolescents, about 80% had tiredness or low energy during the day, while physical pain in the body, muscles and joints affected 60% of them. Headaches persisted in 55% of the teens, while 47% of them continued to have trouble remembering or concentrating. While identifying groups of symptoms distinct to each age group, the researchers developed a long-Covid research index that indicates the likelihood of the condition in a child or a teenager. The index, separate for both age groups, included 18 prolonged symptoms that were more common in children and 17 common among teenagers. "The symptoms that make up the research index are not the only symptoms a child may have and they're not the most severe. But they are most predictive in determining who may have long COVID," said lead author of the study Rachel Gross, an associate professor in the departments of <keyword id="492850" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Paediatrics" source="Orion">Paediatrics</keyword> and Population Health at New York University. In the study group, 45% of the infected (338) and 33% of the uninfected children, along with 39% of the infected and 27 % of the uninfected adolescents reported having at least one prolonged symptom, the authors of the study said. Twenty-six symptoms among infected school-age children and 18 symptoms in infected adolescents persisted in at least 5% of the participants, they said.

You Searched For "Study Group" and got 12 results

New study finds readers can’t tell AI poems from human ones — and they often prefer AI

BI India Bureau

Universities, student groups lobby PM Sunak to keep UK's post-study visa scheme unchanged

PTI

Parents spend more time on their smartphones than children and this might be straining relationships, new study suggests

Divyanshi Sharma

A new study shows that Americans secretly agree on more than they admit

Eliza Relman

Stroke cases increasing globally, air pollution, high temperatures driving numbers, notes Lancet Study

PTI

As a single mom, finances can be tight. Taking my son to Legoland was a good way to teach him about money.

Deborah Goldstein

Just stating facts may not be enough to overcome misinformation: Study

PTI

Most US millionaires don't consider themselves 'wealthy,' study finds

Joshua Nelken-Zitser

To burn fat and improve blood sugar, try intermittent fasting, a new study says

Gabby Landsverk

Excess abdominal fat linked to widespread chronic pain in women, study finds

PTI

A researcher who studied Trump's plans to control the Fed said it could tank the economy

Alice Tecotzky

Symptoms of long Covid differ between children, teens: US study

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides