The annual societal cost of Parkinson's disease across Europe reached €22.8 billion in 2019, equivalent to €28.8 billion at 2025 prices, a new study published today in Movement Disorders has shown. As the number of people living with Parkinson's disease continues to grow, researchers warn that health and social care systems are likely to face increasing pressure.

When referring to diet, the term “plant-based” has mixed interpretations among U.S. adults, and its meaning varies significantly among demographic groups, according to new research published in the American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine. 

Key findings of the study include:

56% said “plant-based” means vegan—avoiding all animal products.

35% said it means eating abundant plant foods while still eating some meat, dairy and eggs.

7% said they didn't know.

2% gave another answer.

Interpretation also varied significantly by demographic group: 63% of adults ages 65-94 equated plant-based with vegan, compared with 51% of 18-to-34-year-olds.

Older adults who experienced food insecurity in both midlife and later life had nearly four times the risk of probable dementia as those who remained food secure, according to new University of Michigan research.

The analysis underpinning the Trump administration's rollback of U.S. vehicle greenhouse-gas standards rests on fundamental errors in how it accounts for environmental benefits and consumers' future fuel savings, according to a Policy Article by Antonio Bento and colleagues. Correcting those errors, the authors argue, would reverse the economic justification for eliminating these federal standards. Vehicle efficiency standards are a major policy tool for reducing transportation emissions in the United States, but their status has repeatedly shifted between presidential administrations. The economic justification for the current Trump administration rollback on emissions standards hinges in part on how regulators assess the future fuel savings consumers receive from more efficient vehicles. Here, Bento et al. examine the regulatory cost-benefit analysis underlying the 2026 US vehicle emissions standard rollback, focusing particularly on how regulators value the fuel savings consumers receive from more efficient vehicles. The findings show that consumers typically pay less than $1 for a vehicle that provides $1 in discounted fuel savings. However, Bento et al. argue that both the Biden and current Trump administrations have misinterpreted what this finding means. In its 2026 analysis, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) credits consumers with receiving only 23 cents of benefit for every dollar of fuel savings, a treatment the authors say wrongly removes billions of dollars in benefits from vehicle emissions standards.

 

The authors developed a framework for translating evidence on consumer behavior into cost-benefit analyses more consistently and transparently. They conclude that correcting the EPA's treatment of fuel savings – along with its decision to exclude environmental benefits – would reverse the economic justification for eliminating federal greenhouse-gas standards for vehicles. “Application of our framework to deal with valuation could correct errors from multiple administrations, providing analytical consistency that could help improve and stabilize policy,” Bento et al. write.

 

For reporters interested in trends, a December 2018 Policy Forum by Antonio Bento and colleagues highlighted fundamental flaws and inconsistencies in a 2018 proposal to freeze the 2016 U.S. vehicle fuel-economy and greenhouse-gas standards.

The war in Iran has strangled one of the world’s most important oil producing regions and trade routes, and gas prices have soared. UC Santa Barbara’s Paasha Mahdavi, associate professor of political science and affiliated faculty at the Bren School, argues that the current conflict provides a unique opportunity to transition toward renewable energy. He sat down to discuss how circumstances have aligned, why countries are digging in their heels, and what solutions are actually working.

UC Irvine researchers analyzed nearly 25,000 heat-related social media posts from across California to examine what factors predict people talking about coping with extreme heat or its effects on daily life.

People living in RVs, vans or boats appeared to face greater challenges during extreme heat while being less likely to discuss ways of coping with it.

The findings suggest that social media could complement traditional public health data and help officials develop more targeted heat warnings, outreach and prevention strategies for vulnerable communities.