Bill MacDonnell's paintings are on display at the Military Museums in Calgary through Remembrance Day and into 2025.

The Martian new year arrives with the Red Planet’s vernal equinox. Explaining why requires a deep dive into celestial mechanics and Earth’s calendrical history

A new survey of plan sponsors sheds light on their satisfaction with transparency at large and small pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).

As you will see, clients remain slightly more satisfied with the perceived transparency of smaller PBMs compared with the Big Three PBMs—CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and Optum Rx.

However, plan sponsors are dissatisfied with transparency about how both large and small PBMs make money. Smaller PBMs have an edge, but it’s narrower than you might think.

Perhaps PBMs’ clients are unable or unwilling to negotiate better deals, write more effective contracts, and switch to more satisfying relationships. Or maybe they don’t mind the current system, despite the challenges for patients. Some argue that transparency could swoop down to solve this problem. Riddle me this: Should we watch what plan sponsors say, or what they do?

Read on to see what you think of my arguments below. Then, click here to share your thoughts with the Drug Channels community.
Read more »

“Children are not small adults.” We invoke this saying, in a vague and hand-wavy manner, whenever we talk about the need to study drugs in pediatric populations. It’s an interesting idea, but it really cries out for further elaboration. If they’re not small adults, what are they? Are pediatric efficacy and safety totally uncorrelated with adult efficacy and safety? Or are children actually kind of like small adults in certain important ways?

Pediatric post-marketing studies have been completed for over 200 compounds in the years since BPCA (2002, offering a reward of 6 months extra market exclusivity/patent life to any drug conducting requested pediatric studies) and PREA (2007, giving FDA power to require pediatric studies) were enacted. I think it is fair to say that at this point, it would be nice to have some sort of comprehensive idea of how FDA views the risks associated with treating children with medications tested only on adults. Are they in general less efficacious? More? Is PK in children predictable from adult studies a reasonable percentage of the time, or does it need to be recharacterized with every drug?

Essentially, my point is that BPCA/PREA is a pretty crude tool: it is both too broad in setting what is basically a single standard for all new adult medications, and too vague as to what exactly that standard is.

In fact, a 2008 published review from FDA staffers and a 2012 Institute of Medicine report both show one clear trend: in a significant majority of cases, pediatric studies resulted in validating the adult medication in children, mostly with predictable dose and formulation adjustments (77 of 108 compounds (71%) in the FDA review, and 27 of 45 (60%) in the IOM review, had label changes that simply reflected that use of the drug was acceptable in younger patients).

So, it seems, most of the time, children are in fact not terribly unlike small adults.

But it’s also true that the percentages of studies that show lack of efficacy, or bring to light a new safety issue with the drug’s use in children, is well above zero. There is some extremely important information here.

To paraphrase John Wanamaker: we know that half our PREA studies are a waste of time; we just don’t know which half.

This would seem to me to be the highest regulatory priority – to be able to predict which new drugs will work as expected in children, and which may truly require further study. After a couple hundred compounds have gone through this process, we really ought to be better positioned to understand how certain pharmacological properties might increase or decrease the risks of drugs behaving differently than expected in children. Unfortunately, neither the FDA nor the IOM papers venture any hypotheses about this – both end up providing long lists of examples of certain points, but not providing any explanatory mechanisms that might enable us to engage in some predictive risk assessment.

While FDASIA did not advance PREA in terms of more rigorously defining the scope of pediatric requirements (or, better yet, requiring FDA to do so), it did address one lingering concern by requiring that FDA publish non-compliance letters for sponsors that do not meet their commitments. (PREA, like FDAAA, is a bit plagued by lingering suspicions that it’s widely ignored by industry.)

The first batch of letters and responses has been published, and it offers some early insights into the problems engendered by the nebulous nature of PREA and its implementation.

These examples, unfortunately, are still a bit opaque – we will need to wait on the FDA responses to the sponsors to see if some of the counter-claims are deemed credible. In addition, there are a few references to prior deferral requests, but the details of the request (and rationales for the subsequent FDA denials) do not appear to be publicly available. You can read FDA’s take on the new postings on their blog, or in the predictably excellent coverage from Alec Gaffney at RAPS.

Looking through the first 4 drugs publicly identified for noncompliance, the clear trend is that there is no trend. All these PREA requirements have been missed for dramatically different reasons.

Here’s a quick rundown of the drugs at issue – and, more interestingly, the sponsor responses:

1. Renvela - Genzyme (full response)

Genzyme appears to be laying responsibility for the delay firmly at FDA’s feet here, basically claiming that FDA continued to pile on new requirements over time:

Genzyme’s correspondence with the FDA regarding pediatric plans and design of this study began in 2006 and included a face to face meeting with FDA in May 2009. Genzyme submitted 8 revisions of the pediatric study design based on feedback from FDA including that received in 4 General Advice Letters. The Advice Letter dated February 17, 2011  contained further recommendations on the study design, yet still required the final clinical study report  by December 31, 2011.

This highlights one of PREA’s real problems: the requirements as specified in most drug approval letters are not specific enough to fully dictate the study protocol. Instead, there is a lot of back and forth between the sponsor and FDA, and it seems that FDA does not always fully account for their own contribution to delays in getting studies started.

2. Hectorol - Genzyme (full response)

In this one, Genzyme blames the FDA not for too much feedback, but for none at all:

On December 22, 2010, Genzyme submitted a revised pediatric development plan (Serial No. 212) which was intended to address FDA feedback and concerns that had been received to date. This submission included proposed protocol HECT05310. [...] At this time, Genzyme has not received feedback from the FDA on the protocol included in the December 22, 2010 submission.

If this is true, it appears extremely embarrassing for FDA. Have they really not provided feedback in over 2.5 years, and yet still sending noncompliance letters to the sponsor? It will be very interesting to see an FDA response to this.

3. Cleviprex – The Medicines Company (full response)

This is the only case where the pharma company appears to be clearly trying to game the system a bit. According to their response:

Recognizing that, due to circumstances beyond the company’s control, the pediatric assessment could not be completed by the due date, The Medicines Company notified FDA in September 2010, and sought an extension. At that time, it was FDA’s view that no extensions were available. Following the passage of FDASIA, which specifically authorizes deferral extensions, the company again sought a deferral extension in December 2012. 

So, after hearing that they had to move forward in 2010, the company promptly waited 2 years to ask for another extension. During that time, the letter seems to imply that they did not try to move the study forward at all, preferring to roll the dice and wait for changing laws to help them get out from under the obligation.

4. Twinject/Adrenaclick – Amedra (full response)

The details of this one are heavily redacted, but it may also be a bit of gamesmanship from the sponsor. After purchasing the injectors, Amedra asked for a deferral. When the deferral was denied, they simply asked for the requirements to be waived altogether. That seems backwards, but perhaps there's a good reason for that.

---

Pakistan's National Security Adviser to the Prime Minister, Mahmud Ali Durrani, on the 2008 bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul

Feb 20, 2024

Although there is broad agreement between the two major parties on the desirability of technology leadership, significant sources of tension—and confusion—persist. By examining the political dynamics that led to the enactment of the CHIPS and Science Act, Constanza M. Vidal Bustamante and Douglass Vijay Calidas probe these tensions and seek to assess their likely impact on the federal technology strategy in the coming years.

Apr 9, 2024

The xz Utils backdoor incident reveals that the security of the global internet depends on countless obscure pieces of software written and maintained by even more obscure unpaid, distractible, and sometimes vulnerable volunteers. It’s an untenable situation, and one that is being exploited by malicious actors. Yet precious little is being done to remedy it.

Apr 22, 2024

On March 05, 2024, the European Commission unveiled its first-ever European Defense Industry Strategy (EDIS). This announcement comes at an unprecedented moment in history.  In Ukraine, the situation remains a dire tactical stalemate, while belligerent Russia seems more threatening than ever to the European bloc. In the US, despite the efforts of the Biden administration, aid to Ukraine stalled for months and remains a contentious issue in Congress. Across Europe, EU Member States are trying to fill the gap in aid, but are struggling to supply Ukraine with the defense systems it urgently needs. On February 10, at a rally in South Carolina, former President and presidential candidate Donald Trump cast doubt on whether he would defend or surrender to Russia any European country that would fail to achieve NATO’s 2%-of-GDP target for defense spending.

Homewood Suites by Hilton Business Traveler B-Roll

John Peden - #NMClientStory

Interview Jean Jouzel, Pr�sident du jury

Alien Invasion Might Happen

The Asbury Park Waterfront

The 12th Annual MORE/FITNESS/SHAPE Women�s Half-Marathon on April 19, 2015 in New York�s Central Park

Behind the scenes with Natalie Morales and Erica Hill at the 12th Annual MORE/SHAPE Women�s Half-Marathon on April 19, 2015.

Behind the scenes with Elizabeth Goodman Artis, Natalie Morales, Danielle Brooks, Padma Lakshmi and Sara Bareilles at the 2016 MORE/SHAPE Women�s Half-Marathon in Central Park on April 17.

Hi everybody.

The question I get most is: "Where do you get your ideas?"

Generally, when I'm asked this question, it's at a book event where it's difficult to answer, because… Well, the answer is long, and complicated, and hard to pin down, and most of the time, I don't really remember how it happened. When an idea starts to arrive, I get to work. I'm not paying attention to how it's happening, or how it would look to an outsider. 

But — a few weeks ago, a new book idea started knocking on the door of my mind. And this time, I decided to pay attention!

What follows is probably the most detailed explanation I'll ever give of where my ideas come from. More specifically, where this particular idea came from, because it's not always the same. But my experience of the past few weeks has been fairly typical for me, and I'll add that there are a few activities I need to engage in every single time, if I want an idea to take root. Namely: PATIENCE. LISTENING. And, LABOR. Book ideas require a certain honed receptiveness, and they require a LOT OF WORK. 

I'm yelling because I'm trying to push back against the idea that ideas simply come to writers. Yes, some parts of ideas come to writers. But when I first get a book idea, what "comes to me" probably comprises about 0.1% of what could properly be called a book idea. Often, it's little more than an inchoate feeling. With patience, listening, and labor, I transform the idea into something I can grasp, and work with.

I'll add that yes, we do hear sometimes of writers whose ideas "simply came to them," fully formed. I'm going to take a guess that (1) this doesn't happen very often, if ever, with books that have complicated structures or plots, and (2) writers who are blessed by ideas in this way probably have a long-honed practice of receptiveness.

Anyway. Warning upfront that this may be a little unstructured, because the process is a little unstructured. It's challenging to describe, and I'm still in the middle of it. But here's what my last few weeks have been like.

A few weeks ago, while watching a TV show that had a certain mood/aura that'd really sucked me in, I found myself drawn to the idea of a story involving three characters. I'm not going to tell you what TV show I was watching, and I'm not going to tell you anything about my three characters, because story ideas are intensely, intensely private. The first time I say anything publicly about it will probably be years from now, if and when this book is ever scheduled for release. But let me try to explain a bit about that moment when the first glimmering of the idea appeared. 

Like I said, I'd been watching a TV show when it happened. But my three characters weren't characters in that TV show. Nor did anyone in that TV show relate to each other the way my three characters seemed to want to relate. Nor did my three characters seem to live in a world like the world of the TV show. The TV show helped to launch the idea at me because of the show's mood and its feeling, and how much I cared about the people in it. But my idea? As is often the case, my idea came from something I saw missing in the TV show. Not missing because there was a flaw in the TV writers' story; I loved their story! But missing (for me and possibly only me) because their story was not the story I would have told.

I think that a lot of my idea seeds come from my adoration of other people's stories, but also from my noticing what's missing in those stories, for me. What story I would've like to have seen told; what characters the story lacked.

Anyway. So this idea of these three characters came to me. But when I say "idea of these three characters," already that sounds more substantial than it was. I knew they were three humans (or humanoids; I didn't know what genre the story was, so they could've been aliens on another planet, for all I knew. In fact, I actively considered whether they might have different biology than ours). I knew they cared about each other, but I didn't know in what way. I knew they were facing a challenge that would strain all of their relationships. I thought they might be grown-ups, but I wasn't sure. I thought I knew at least two of their genders, but I wasn't sure. I knew they lived in a world with magic, but I didn't know what "magic" meant in the context of their world. I didn't know where they lived, or when they lived (past? future? futuristic past? postindustrial future? any of about a hundred other possibilities). I knew a whole lot of things that the characters weren't, and that the world wasn't — which is another way of saying that my sense of what this story was was actually more defined by all the things I knew it wasn't. (Apologies if this is vague. I'm not being intentionally vague! I'll try for some concrete examples: I knew I didn't want to write a story where partway through, someone suddenly discovers they have an inborn power they didn't know they had. I knew I didn't want to write a love triangle. There's a certain kind of high-handed fantasy tone that I knew wasn't right for this story. But I didn't know what I did want yet at this point.)

Really, all I knew was that I seemed to be having an idea.

So, like a writer, I did what I needed to do: 

• I made space in my mind for receptiveness. (I scheduled uninterruptable alone time. I stopped listening to podcasts while I was out walking, and instead, just walked, so my mind could wander. I put aside non-urgent tasks for a while so that I didn't have the feeling of a to-do list hanging over my head. I gave myself permission to wool-gather, to become vague and absent-minded. I set three timers any time I cooked anything so I could feel free to forget I was cooking, but also not burn the house down. I remembered to thank my husband frequently for being willing to live with a space cadet.)
• I thought about what fertilizer might help the idea to grow, especially fertilizer in the form of books, TV, and movies. I put all other books, TV, and movies aside. (I kept watching that same TV show, and I also began reading almost exclusively one writer who had a narrative tone — and also subject matter — that helped me sustain a mood that felt concurrent with the mood of my own idea. Why does this kind of intake help? It keeps my mind in a story space, while also giving me something to bounce my own ideas off of. It's a kind of reading, or watching, that involves a state of constant interactivity and reactivity. Everything I'm consuming becomes about something else that I'm looking for. It's difficult to explain, maybe because it gets back to that inexplicable moment when new ideas form.)
• I made sure that every single time I had any new thoughts relating to my idea, I wrote them down. (This meant making reminders on my phone; sending strings of emails to myself; choosing a notebook where I began to jot things down; sending texts to myself on my husband's phone, if his phone was closer to hand than mine.)
• I looked at my schedule to give myself a sense of if and when I might have a few days soon to put my current writing project aside and give some true, devoted time to this new idea. (I was, and still am, in the middle of revisions of the next Graceling Realm book when this happened, and that was, and still is, my absolute first priority. As exciting and intense as a new idea can be, it can't unseat me from my current object of devotion.)

By chance, last week, I did in fact have some time away from my revision while it was briefly with my editor. I was able to devote an entire week to the new book idea. So, next, I'll try to describe what a week of intense idea-gathering looks like for me! (Though I should say that this will differ from book to book. It's been pretty clear to me from the beginning that this new idea is going to be slow to grow — planning this book will take way more than a week. In contrast, last fall, I found myself with a new and sudden book idea that coincided with the end of another project, so I had some free time and was able to sit down and hammer out the entire book plan, which took only a few days. I think this is because that book was shorter and less emotionally complicated than this new book will be, and was set in a less complex world. Also, at the time, I was absolutely thrumming with the adrenaline and momentum of having just finished a writing project, so book-planning became a way to channel that energy. Often these processes are subject to whatever else is going on in my life.)

So. My week of intense idea-gathering looked a lot like what I've already described — reading, watching TV, but now also with long hours of sitting staring at a blank page and/or lying on my back staring at the ceiling — but with a more specific goal. Namely, I was trying to figure out what my main questions were. For me, every book starts (and continues, as I write) with an extremely long list of questions that I'm trying to find the answers to, but it takes work to figure out what the questions are. The questions can be very different from book to book. And it's essential, at the beginning, to identify what the main questions are.

When I'm first idea-gathering, I use very short notebooks in which I scribble down all my random thoughts as they come (I like using these twenty-page notebooks from Laughing Elephant, because they're short enough not to feel intimidatingly important). Then I have one longer, thicker notebook which is for my more coherent thoughts — my more serious book planning. During my week of active idea-gathering, I came up with the following list of major questions, worthy of being written down in my thick, "serious" planning notebook:

MAJOR QUESTIONS.

• What is magic?
• How does bad human behavior manifest in this world? (for real *)
• Where/what culture does each of them come from? What family?
• How is society governed?
• Who is each of them — as a person and as a power manifestation?
• How is the narrative positioned?
• What is the plot?
• How do humans relate to the rest of the natural world?
• What is gender? (for real *)

* and by societal definition

So. I'm not sure how closely you looked at those questions — but they are pretty gigantic questions! It took me a week to identify all of them. It's going to take me much, much longer to answer them. Which goes back to my point that ideas don't just "come to me." The merest seed of an idea might come to me, and after that, I make the space, and do the work.

As I began to hammer out my questions, I continued to read, watch things, and wool-gather, but with more intense focus. Because now I was also trying to answer these questions as they came. It was interesting to observe the order in which I began to find the answers. Not surprisingly, probably since my novels tend to be character-based, it was the character-based questions that drew me in first. “What is gender" in particular, because I have a sense that in this story, my characters' relationships to gender are absolutely integral to who they are, and I can’t get very far with a book plan if I don’t know who my characters are. I also started to gather some clues about their personalities and their strengths. Enough that after a couple of days, I got to the point where I suddenly knew I needed their names. Names ground everything, and they can also change some things; at a certain point, I can't make any further progress without names. I spent one entire day last week mostly just trying to figure out three people's names. Once I had the names, I was able to return to my questions.

Then, not too long after that, a moment arose where I knew, again quite suddenly, that what I needed next was at least the broad strokes of a plot. If I’m a little scornful about the concept of inspiration — because it’s a concept that dismisses how hard I work! — I do believe in intuition, and also in experience. Intuition and experience told me that I'd reached the point in my planning where the needs of my plot would hold the answer to a lot of my other questions. Like, how this place is governed; what constitutes bad behavior; and even some character things, like what culture each of my characters is from. Sometimes, once you know what needs to happen in a story, it becomes easier to picture the structure of your world. Because a plot comes with needs; once a plot exists, it limits some of your other options. For example, let's say your plot involves a particular kind of government-based corruption. Well, thinking about that corruption will probably start to show you some of your options for the structure of the government. Once you know the structure of the government, you might begin to understand who holds governmental power — which can lead to answers about how families are structured. Which can lead to answers about culture, which can lead to answers about the societal definition of bad behavior, etc.

So. I reached the point where I needed at least a sense of my plot. But: plotting is a HUGE job. I knew it wasn't something I could do in just a few days, and at this point I also knew that I was going to need to return to my revision soon. So, intuition told me that it was time to stop. Not stop being receptive; not necessarily stop reading or watching the helpful things; not stop sending myself emails, texts, and reminders; but stop trying to make any real, meaty, major progress on this book idea. I needed to save the job of plotting for when I next had a stretch of uninterrupted worktime. Maybe another free week or two somewhere, between other projects.

So, I did some final organizing of my notebook. I transferred things into it from other notebooks and I designating a huge number of empty pages in it for future plot thoughts and future character thoughts. I did this even though in this book, as in most of my books, I sense that character and plot will ultimately end up being the same thing, so it's not going to matter much which thoughts I file where. (In other words, most of my plot is going to spring from who my characters are, and many of my characters will spring from the needs of the plot.) But at this messy stage in planning, it's important to me to feel organized. The illusion of organization stops me from feeling as overwhelmed as I probably should be feeling. So I label things, and delude myself that I can contain this messy process inside a nice neat notebook ????. 

I organized my notebook, and then I put it aside. Today I'm still open to thoughts about my new book idea, but it's not my entire worklife anymore... it's more of a promise for the future. It'll probably be good to have it simmering on the back burner for a while. I'll be able to approach it with a new freshness when I sit down with it again one day.

So. I'm not sure how satisfyingly I've answered the question "Where do you get your ideas?" After all, this idea is still very much in progress. I figured out a lot of stuff last week, but mostly what I figured out is a long list of all the things I don't know yet. There will be many, many more workweeks to go before I'll be able to claim that I truly have an idea for a book. 

But this is my best shot at an answer to the question of where my ideas come from! I guess the point I want to convey is this: I don’t necessarily believe in inspiration. But I believe that sometimes a writer will start to get the merest sense of a story that's missing from the world, and find herself wanting to write that story. At that point, if circumstance allows her the time and space to enter a state that is extremely internally-focused and possibly involves a lot of intake (reading, watching other stories), or if not that, at least an extreme level of sensitivity and receptiveness, of seeing, of listening... And if she puts in the work… her idea-seed will start to take root, and grow into a real, workable idea that might one day be the beginnings of a book! 

And of course, every writer does this differently. Many writers don't plan or plot ahead of time. They figure out the idea as they write. So there's no right or wrong way to do it. 

But this is my best explanation of how I do it.

Godspeed to all writers.

Today, Gareth Hinds's beautiful graphic novel adaptation of Graceling hits stores. Join us for an event! Here's a link to all your options.

Renowned singer Chappell Roan has stirred discussions among her fans after she commented on Billboard’s post that stated that she has parted ways with her management team and manager, Nick Bobetsky. She recently made headlines after her name was inducted into the list of candidates who are nominated in the big categories of next year’s […]

The post Why Fans Think Chappell Roan Has Fired Her Manager Nick Bobetsky appeared first on ComingSoon.net - Movie Trailers, TV & Streaming News, and More.

Dutch Palestinian analyst Mouin Rabbani discusses the violence that broke out last week between visiting Israeli soccer fans and pro-Palestinian protesters in Amsterdam. The Dutch authorities made over 60 arrests, and at least five people were hospitalized as a result of the clashes, which local and international leaders were quick to brand as antisemitic, even though observers in Amsterdam have said it was Israeli hooligans who instigated much of the violence. Rabbani says that while it’s common for rival teams’ fans to get into skirmishes, what happened in Amsterdam was different. “What we’re talking about here in Amsterdam is not a clash between the hooligans of two opposing sides, but rather these Israeli thugs attacking people who, in principle, had nothing to do with the game, and then afterwards being confronted by their victims,” Rabbani says.

The earliest evidence of livestock with modified horns has been discovered in ancient Egypt – sheep skulls with horns that point in unnatural directions suggest humans forced them to grow that way

Manga about sales representative who likes condom researcher Musubu-san launched in 2017

Chapter 13: "Redemption" comic 1609
[read...]
[permalink]

It's Bat Appreciation Month, minions, and I'm sure we can all agree: bats of every kind are pretty amazing.

Whether they're long and lumpy:

Or short and girthy:

Whether they have a huge, misshapen head:

Or bend juuuust slightly to the right:

Yep, bats are the bees knees, no matter where you stick them.

[urgent whispers from John]

What's that? I'm celebrating the wrong kind of bat?

OH! Bat bats. The flappy ones. Got it.

Huh.

::pause::

I dunno, after all that, a pumpkin in a bat hat feels a little... anticlimactic?


Well thanks anyway, Paula I., Marlene B., Heidi B., Emily D., Angela K., & Daniel G. I'm sure we'll have much less confusion with next week's hard rock cakes.

*****

Here's my actual contribution to Bat Appreciation Month: I found the prettiest lil' bat necklace for less than $10:

Gothic Bat Necklace

OooOOOOooh.

*****

And from my other blog, Epbot:

The post And they all lived happily ever after. appeared first on Indexed.

Have a wonderful weekend, friends.

Zoom has always included a clickable button/badge at the top left of its primary meeting interface window. Click the badge to copy the URL of that meeting. You can then, with just one more click in any messaging system, send that URL to the other meeting participants. Fast. Simple. Drop-dead easy. Elegant. It comes in […]

The post What happened to the Share button in Zoom? appeared first on Zeldman on Web and Interaction Design.

The British overseas territory was invaded 40 years ago, beginning a short but bitter conflict.

The government has confirmed Sue Gray will not take up her post as the PM's envoy to the nations and regions.

Highlights: Lack of exercise leads to weight gain and obesity-related health risks A sedentary lifestyle weaken

Lifestyle habits can influence the diversity of beneficial bacteria and other microorganisms in the mouth, according to a new study led by Penn State biologists.

In our daily lives, immense importance is given to body hygiene, physical appearance, and how we present ourselves when we go to our workplace or social gatherings.

The integration of groundwater-based irrigation systems with farmer-managed irrigation systems holds great potential, says IWMI researchers.

The post Making Nepali farmers happy first appeared on International Water Management Institute (IWMI).

Researchers have united in a consortium called SSPsyGene to investigate the genetic origins of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders (NPD), including

The human brain's extended development is distinct among mammals and is believed to enhance our advanced learning capabilities. Disruptions in this process

You may be familiar with the gut microbiome's impact on overall health. Surprisingly, a similar principle applies to the semen microbiome, which may significantly

Highlights: Around the new year, we end up making a list of new year's resolutions and figuring out how to kee

Richard Simmons, a beloved figure in the world of fitness and health, passed away at the age of 76 in Los Angeles from natural causes. Simmons, known

Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation Funds Amicus Therapeutics To Advance Pharmacological Chaperone Technology

The world-famous god man and Spiritual leader Sri Sathya Sai Baba passed away at his Sathya Sai super specialty hospita

Benefits of meditation and yoga on mental and emotional health have been emphasized at the i 15th Annual Global Health Summit /i under the aegis

Located just off the coast of Belize, Four Seasons Resort & Residences Caye Chapel will include a 104-key luxury hotel composed of expertly-designed guest rooms and suites, including a collection of 18 overwater bungalows. Designed by Mauricio Gomez de Tudo and Taller G, the hotel seamlessly blends the natural island allure with the five-star service attributed to the Four Seasons brand. Guests will enjoy world-class amenities, including two beach clubs, a full-service, cenote-inspired spa, and select access to a 10-hole championship, reversible course designed by Greg Norman—part of the Caye Chapel Golf & Ocean Club. The Resort will also feature a collection of 24 Four Seasons branded residences lining the Northern perimeter of the island, ranging from 2- to 4-bedrooms and available fully turn-key. The residences are expected to be delivered alongside the hotel in 2025, and begin at $4.5M, inclusive of full membership to the Caye Chapel Golf & Ocean Club.