 |
|
|
|||||
Mark Zuckerbergs new house in Miami Beach has sweeping waterfront views. It also sits at ground zero for climate change. Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, are the latest in a string of billionaires and celebrities to move to Indian Creek, a private island in Miamis Biscayne Bay. Neighbors include Jeff Bezos, who owns three homes on the island, as well as investor Carl Icahn, Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner. Like much of Miami, the area faces mounting climate risks. Its very subject to flooding and rising seas, says Stephen Leatherman, an environmental professor at Florida International University who studies the states islands. Miamis sea levels have risen eight inches since 1950. By 2040, the water is projected to be 10 to 17 inches higher than it was in 2000. As the water rises, thats making sunny day flooding from high tides more commonup 400% over the last 20 years in Miami Beachand storm surges are increasingly dangerous. First Street, an organization that analyzes climate risk for specific properties, doesnt yet have data for Zuckerbergs house, which was newly built. But it estimates that a home down the street faces severe flood risk, with the potential for 5.9 feet of flooding in an extreme event. That property also faces possible 184-mile-per-hour hurricane winds and more than three weeks per year of extreme heat. Indian Creek is an artificial island, created in the early 1900s by dredging sediment from the bay. It was once a mangrove forest, dense with trees and shrubs that helped shield Miami from storms. Today, only about 2% of mangroves remain in the area. Ironically, wealthy homeowners have often cut down mangroves in front of their own homes to have better views, increasing their flood risk. The island sits around seven feet above sea level, slightly higher than some other parts of Miami. But other parts of Miami are sinking, and its not clear if the island, built on soft sediment, may also be subsiding. And if a hurricane comes, theyre going to get a big storm surge in there, says Leatherman. In theory, the water could surge as high as 15 feet to 20 feet in parts of Miami in a worst-case hurricane. Of course, Zuckerberg and his neighbors have money to throw at the problem. If youre willing to build to a higher standard to mitigate against wind by putting concrete gables on your house, and you basically build a bunker, you can do that, says Ed Kearns, chief science officer at First Street. And if you raise that bunker up 10 feet, then youre above the storm surge. He points to a house that survived Hurricane Michael when every nearby house was destroyed. (Zuckerberg and Chan did not immediately respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment.) Climate change also poses other threats to infrastructure in the areafor example, saltwater is beginning to contaminate drinking water, and critical power stations are more exposed to flooding. Still, a billionaire has the option to easily leave in a disaster: Zuckerberg, for example, also owns other houses in California and Hawaii. The new house, worth perhaps $150 to $200 million, is only 0.087% of his net worth; if it was destroyed in a hurricane, he could handle the loss. (Its worth noting that Zuckerberg may be changing his primary residence to avoid the possibility of a 5% wealth tax in California, which could put him on the hook for an $11 billion tax bill; so far, the proposed tax hasn’t yet been approved as a ballot measure for this fall’s election, but some wealthy residents are already moving.) The same isnt true for non-billionaires in the area. Floridians are already grappling with rising insurance premiumsor the challenge of getting insurance at allas extreme storms keep hitting the state. As Miamis population grows, housing costs are climbing, potentially pushing lower-income residents into more flood-prone neighborhoods. The city as a whole has far fewer resources to invest in resilience than the small, heavily fortified Billionaire Bunker island of Indian Creek. The contrast is stark. Most Miami residents face increasing vulnerability to climate change. Billionaires like Zuckerberg can mitigate many of the risks, but doing so comes at a price and raises broader questions about whether $200 million might be better spent strengthening public resilience rather than building private fortifications.
Category:
E-Commerce
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is refusing to consider Moderna’s application for a new flu vaccine made with Nobel Prize-winning mRNA technology, the company announced Tuesday.The news is the latest sign of the FDA’s heightened scrutiny of vaccines under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., particularly those using mRNA technology, which he has criticized before and after becoming the nation’s top health official.Moderna received what’s called a “refusal-to-file” letter from the FDA that objected to how it conducted a 40,000-person clinical trial comparing its new vaccine to one of the standard flu shots used today. That trial concluded the new vaccine was somewhat more effective in adults 50 and older than that standard shot.The letter from FDA vaccine director Dr. Vinay Prasad said the agency doesn’t consider the application to contain an “adequate and well-controlled trial” because it didn’t compare the new shot to “the best-available standard of care in the United States at the time of the study.” Prasad’s letter pointed to some advice FDA officials gave Moderna in 2024, under the Biden administration, which Moderna didn’t follow.According to Moderna, that feedback said it was acceptable to use the standard-dose flu shot the company had chosenbut that another brand specifically recommended for seniors would be preferred for anyone 65 and older in the study. Still, Moderna said, the FDA did agree to let the study proceed as originally planned.The company said it also had shared with FDA additional data from a separate trial comparing the new vaccine against a licensed high-dose shot used for seniors.The FDA “did not identify any safety or efficacy concerns with our product” and “does not further our shared goal of enhancing America’s leadership in developing innovative medicines,” Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel said in a statement.It’s rare that FDA refuses to file an application, particularly for a new vaccine, which requires companies and FDA staff to engage in months or years of discussions.Moderna has requested an urgent meeting with FDA, and noted that it has applied for the vaccine’s approval in Europe, Canada, and Australia.In the last year, FDA officials working under Kennedy have rolled back recommendations around COVID-19 shots, added extra warnings to the two leading COVID vaccineswhich are made with mRNA technologyand removed critics of the administration’s approach from an FDA advisory panel.Kennedy announced last year that his department would cancel more than $500 million in contracts and funding for the development of vaccines using mRNA.The FDA for decades has allowed vaccine makers to quickly update their annual flu shots to target the latest strains by showing that they trigger an immune response in patients. That’s a far more efficient approach than running long-term studies tracking whether patients get the flu and how they fare. In an internal memo last year, Prasad wrote that the streamlined method would no longer be permittedleading more than a dozen former FDA commissioners to pen an editorial condemning the statements.-The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Lauran Neergaard and Matthew Perrone, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
This year, the number of mothers with young children exiting the U.S. labor market saw the sharpest January-to-June decline in more than four decades. That isnt a coincidenceand it isnt a lack of ambition. Across industries, women are reassessing howand whetherwork fits into their lives. Not because they want to step back, but because too many workplaces are still designed around outdated assumptions about who provides care and how work gets done. As leaders debate return-to-office mandates, women are quietly doing the mathand deciding whether staying is worth the cost. This isnt a womens issue. Its a design failure. And its one leaders can choose to fix. THE PERPETUAL STRUGGLE OF THE DOUBLE SHIFT The pandemic exposed and intensified a long-standing dilemma: how working women can balance their careers with family demands. Even years later, in dual-income households, women continue to shoulder the majority of caregiving responsibilities, often juggling work, childcare, elder care, and the invisible but relentless mental load that comes with it. Even now, many women are still working two full-time jobs: one at work and another at home. In a recent workplace study conducted by my company, 65% of working mothers reported carrying more household and childcare responsibilities than their partners, and nearly half said they shoulder most of the mental and emotional burden at home. When workplaces remain rigid and unsupportive, that strain compounds, pushing women toward burnout or out of the workforce entirely. Now, rigid return-to-office (RTO) mandates threaten to add more fuel to the fire. For the first time since COVID, most Fortune 100 companies have reinstated full-time, in-office policies, and women are among the groups disproportionately affected. In our study, three out of four working women said RTO mandates make it harder for them to stay in the workforce long term. THE HIGH COST OF LOSING SENIOR FEMALE TALENT Supporting and retaining female talent isn’t only about equity; its about competitive advantage. While losing top-performing talent of either gender can hurt, when senior female leaders leave, there are broader financial and cultural ripple effects. The business case is well established: when women hold 30% or more executive roles within an organization, the company outperforms its peers. In a competitive labor market, the ability to attract and retain top talentincluding highly educated, experienced womencan make or break a company’s growth trajectory. THE REDESIGN: FLEXIBILITY, SUPPORT, AND TRUST The solution isnt another round of workplace perks. Its redesigning work. Im a strong believer in the value of coming together in person. Offices create connections and strengthen culture in ways that are hard to replicate remotely. They provide an environment for collaboration and problem-solving. But returning to the office can exacerbate the challenges many employeesespecially caregiversare navigating if not done thoughtfully. How work is structured matters just as much as where it happens. Flexibility isnt about eliminating expectations or avoiding the office. Its about trusting employees to manage their time responsibly and deliver results within a clear, well-designed framework. Our research shows that 90% of employees believe return-to-office policieswhether hybrid or full-timeare more successful when companies pair them with real support, including mental health resources, reasonable flexibility, and leaders who model balance and trust. Ive lived this firsthand. For nearly a decade, I built an executive career while caring for my father through repeated ICU and hospital stays and critical illness. I was fortunate to have the support of my husband, friends, and familybut what made it truly possible was the flexibility and trust my managers extended to me during that time. That trust wasnt given lightly; I earned it through commitment and performance. In return, their support during one of the hardest periods of my life made me fiercely loyal to my company and a stronger, more empathetic leader. Practical support matters just as much. Flexible time-off policies, backup care for emergencies, elder care resources, and mental health services arent perkstheyre infrastructure and are foundational to productivity, engagement, and loyalty. Companies invest millions in office space and technology. To truly benefit from those investments, they must also invest in systems that allow people to show up consistently, focused, and ready to do their best work. And this isnt only about women. Forty percent of men now identify as their familys primary caregiver. If organizations dont support them as well, the imbalance many women experience will only grow. I know from my own life that even today, I couldnt manage my work and family responsibilities without my husbands partnership. BLUEPRINT FOR SUCCESS Companies face a clear choice: cling to outdated assumptions about work and risk losing talented women or evolve how they support work. Some organizations will operate in hybrid models; others will return fully to the office. The real differentiator wont be the policy itself; it will be how thoughtfully leaders design and support work within it, especially for caregivers. Redesigning work doesnt mean lowering standards. It means aligning expectations with how life actually works, and giving people the structure, support, and trust they need to perform at a high level. Workplaces built this way dont just retain womenthey build stronger cultures, develop better leaders, and outperform over the long term. Alison Borland is Chief People and Strategy Officer at Modern Health.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||