This is especially true for companies with brick-and-mortar footprints.

What’s the first thing you think of when you see an empty mall, the JCPenney and Best Buy branding still visible on the exterior? What about an empty Pier 1 Imports that transforms into a Spirit Halloween every October?

An abandoned storefront, with its broken signage and grimy or boarded-up windows, does more to erode public goodwill than any charitable donation can repair. In the eyes of the community, these empty spaces symbolize failure, not just of a business, but of its commitment to the neighborhood it once served. No amount of behind-the-scenes philanthropy will change that perception.

The solution?

A radical rethinking of how companies engage with their physical spaces and the communities they inhabit. It is time to turn these liabilities into assets, not just for the companies, but for society as a whole.

From Empty Storefronts to Community Hubs

Imagine walking past a former big-box store, its parking lot now overgrown with weeds and its facade a canvas for graffiti. The windows are broken. Shopping carts, bent and broken, litter the landscape.

Now, picture that same building, instead transformed into a vibrant mixed-use development: affordable homes on the upper floors, a market, day care center, and gym on the ground level. You can see through some of the windows greenery thriving in vertical farming installations inside. Solar panels cover the roof and gardens surround the structure. The building hums with human activity — people coming and going, talking, laughing and living.

Instead of a glaring symbol of corporate abandonment, it becomes a beacon of hope and renewal.

Brick-and-mortar locations offer untapped potential for such transformations. Retailers, banks, and other companies often own sprawling properties that, once vacated, sit idle for years. These empty spaces do not just drain resources — companies still have to pay taxes, keep the water connected, and keep the power on, after all — they actively harm a brand’s reputation: remember the Pier 1 that turns into a Spirit Halloween?

By converting these spaces into sustainable, mixed-use developments, companies can directly address critical societal issues like the housing crisis while revitalizing communities. The benefits are numerous and substantial:

1. Community Revitalization: Vacant properties drag down property values and discourage investment. Transforming these spaces into functional, attractive developments breathes new life into neighborhoods, attracting residents and businesses alike.
2. Environmental Impact: Adaptive reuse is far more sustainable than demolition and new construction. By repurposing existing structures, companies can significantly reduce waste and lower their carbon footprint.
3. Brand Reputation and Revenue Generation: Nothing says “we care” like visible, meaningful action. These projects demonstrate a company’s commitment to the community in a way that is impossible to ignore.
4. Economic Opportunity: Mixed-use developments create jobs, from construction to ongoing operations. They also stimulate local economies by attracting foot traffic and supporting small businesses. And for the company, critics might argue that such projects are costly or impractical, but the reality is quite the opposite. Adaptive reuse is a cost-effective strategy, often more affordable than building from scratch and certainly a better option than hoping for the best and putting a blighted property on the market for sale or auction. By leveraging public-private partnerships, tax incentives, and grants for sustainable development, companies can offset initial costs and turn a profit.

Doing Good, Making Money

The idea that purpose and profit are mutually exclusive is a false dichotomy. In fact, doing good can be a powerful driver of business success. Consumers increasingly want to support brands that align with their values. A company that invests in community-focused projects can strengthen its relationship with customers, leading to increased loyalty and advocacy.

Proactive community engagement reduces the risk of backlash or boycotts, which can arise when companies are perceived as neglectful or exploitative. By investing in communities, companies create conditions for sustainable growth. Thriving neighborhoods mean more customers, healthier economies, and stronger local partnerships.

Consider the trend of turning vacant shopping malls into mixed-use developments. Across the United States, developers are repurposing these once-bustling retail hubs into spaces that combine housing, office space, entertainment, and public amenities. Projects like these not only address pressing social needs but also generate new revenue streams for property owners.

Brands shouldn’t let developers be the only ones doing these kinds of conversions.

Time to Change the CSR Paradigm

The days of superficial CSR are over. Companies can no longer rely on checkbook philanthropy or flashy ad campaigns to convince the public they are doing good. Real impact requires bold, innovative thinking and a willingness to put skin in the game.

For businesses with brick-and-mortar locations, the path forward is clear. Every vacant storefront is an opportunity to rewrite the narrative, to transform a symbol of failure into one of possibility. By investing in sustainable, community-focused projects, companies can not only restore their reputations but also contribute to solving some of society’s most pressing challenges.

Cullen Burnell is Chief Integration & People Officer at Urbana Systems

The post Brick-and-Mortar CSR and Community Prosperity appeared first on Medika Life.

Around the nation, there is a partisan swirl around ESG. The concern of being targeted for boycotts or protests has made it more important for organizations to thoughtfully plan and implement a strategy that moves key priorities forward without creating unnecessary churn in public policy, news, and investment communities.

Setting the Baseline

With the substantial debate surrounding ESG priorities, it’s helpful to remind ourselves what ESG priorities actually are and what they seek to achieve. At its core, ESG is a relatively straightforward concept: ESG includes varied criteria companies use to evaluate performance beyond traditional financial metrics. For instance, environmental factors consider a company’s impact on nature, including its carbon footprint, resource usage, and pollution levels. Social factors assess a company’s relationships with its employees, communities, and broader society, covering labor practices, diversity and inclusion, and community engagement. Governance factors focus on a company’s internal governance structures, including its board composition, executive pay, and transparency.

Though it’s evolved into a political hot-button issue in recent years, ESG priorities, though perhaps itemized as separate workflows, have been a consideration in boardrooms and c-suites for decades. There’s nothing particularly new about the individual components, just how they’re grouped and classified.

The Evolution of ESG Priorities

Initially, ESG priorities were driven by compliance and risk management concerns. Companies focused on meeting regulatory requirements and mitigating potential risks, such as environmental fines or reputational damage. However, as the understanding of sustainability deepened and climate concerns became more acute and amplified, ESG priorities shifted toward mindful value creation. Companies started to see ESG as a set of rules to follow and as a way to create long-term value for their stakeholders and society at the same time — a win-win scenario.

Today, regardless of how public-facing their efforts are or aren’t, leading companies consider ESG a priority rather than a compliance checkbox. They recognize the potential for ESG initiatives to encourage innovation, enhance brand reputation, attract talent, and strengthen stakeholder relationships. Consequently, ESG priorities have expanded to include innovation for sustainability, supply chain resilience, human rights protection, and ethical leadership.

While adopting ESG principles gained momentum in the business world, it has not been without strife, especially against political turmoil. The intersection of ESG with politics sparked debates on various fronts, including the role of businesses in social and environmental issues, the impact of government policies on sustainability efforts, and the polarization of ESG discourse.

ESG Nomenclature

Alongside the evolution of ESG priorities, the terminology surrounding ESG has changed. Initially, terms like “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) and “sustainable development” were commonly used to describe efforts to address social and environmental issues. However, these terms often lacked specificity and failed to capture the holistic nature of ESG.

In recent years, the term “ESG” emerged as a more comprehensive framework for addressing sustainability issues within the business context. Unlike CSR, which often focuses on reputation, philanthropy, and corporate donations, ESG includes broader considerations, including governance practices, diversity of the workforce, and financial performance. This shift in terminology reflects a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness between environmental, social, and governance factors and their impact on business outcomes.

Then, ESG became a flashpoint for controversy owing to varied factors, with the term becoming toxic for some organizations. There are many reasons why that toxicity grew pervasive:

1. Political Polarization

Political polarization has entered the discourse surrounding ESG in many parts of the world. Ideological differences often shape perceptions of sustainability initiatives, with some viewing them as essential steps toward addressing pressing global challenges. In contrast, others see them as burdensome regulations that stifle economic growth.

This polarization can manifest in various ways, from debates over climate change policy to disagreements on social justice issues. For example, in the United States, the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the rollback of environmental regulations under past administrations fueled tensions between proponents and opponents of sustainability measures, putting corporations in an uncomfortable position straddling public policy on both sides.

2. Regulatory Uncertainty

Political turmoil can also contribute to regulatory uncertainty, complicating business ESG implementation. Shifts in government leadership or policy priorities may lead to changes in regulations and standards, creating challenges for companies trying to navigate complex and evolving compliance landscapes.

Even simple regional variances in regulatory frameworks can pose significant compliance risks and operational challenges for multinational corporations operating in multiple jurisdictions. Furthermore, regulatory uncertainty may deter investment in sustainable initiatives as companies weigh long-term sustainability investments’ potential risks and rewards against short-term political uncertainties.

3. Stakeholder Activism

Political turmoil often fuels grassroots activism and social movements, influencing ESG agendas and priorities. Stakeholder activism, ranging from consumer boycotts to shareholder resolutions, has become a powerful force driving corporate action on sustainability issues.

However, the alignment of stakeholder activism with political ideologies can sometimes increase tension within ESG discourse. For example, debates over corporate social responsibility have, at times, become entangled with broader political debates over the role of government in addressing social and environmental issues.

The question then becomes whether businesses should take up leadership positions on these issues and if so, to what extent.

4. Globalization and Geopolitical Risks

In an interconnected world, geopolitical risks and global events can have profound practical implications for ESG priorities and practices. Trade tensions, geopolitical conflicts, and geopolitical instability can disrupt supply chains, exacerbate environmental degradation, and impact social stability, posing challenges for companies seeking to uphold ESG standards.

For example, geopolitical conflicts in regions rich in natural resources may raise concerns about ethical sourcing and human rights violations in supply chains. Similarly, trade disputes between significant economies can disrupt the flow of goods and services, affecting businesses’ ability to meet sustainability commitments and deliver on ESG goals.

5. Ethical Dilemmas

Political turmoil can also give rise to ethical dilemmas for businesses navigating ESG issues. Companies may face pressure to take a stance on politically sensitive issues, such as human rights abuses, corruption, or discrimination, especially in authoritarian regimes or conflict-affected regions.

Balancing business interests with ethical considerations can be challenging, particularly when governments impose conflicting demands or restrictions on companies operating within their jurisdictions. In such cases, companies may find torn between upholding their ESG principles and complying with local laws or regulations, raising questions about the limits of corporate responsibility in politically charged environments.

The Role of Stakeholder Engagement

One key driver behind the evolution of ESG priorities is increased stakeholder engagement. With growing pressure from investors, customers, employees, and communities to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability, these stakeholders demand transparency, accountability, and tangible action on ESG issues, pushing companies to elevate their priorities beyond mere rhetoric.

Investors mainly play a crucial role in shaping ESG priorities. The rise of sustainable investing and impact investing has prompted companies to integrate ESG considerations into their financial decision-making processes. As a result, ESG performance has become a significant factor in investment decisions, influencing capital allocation and valuation.

Emerging Trends in ESG

As ESG continues to evolve, several emerging trends are shaping the future of sustainable business. One such trend is the emphasis on impact measurement and reporting. Companies are increasingly adopting standardized frameworks such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) to assess and communicate their ESG performance. This trend enhances transparency and facilitates comparability and benchmarking across industries.

Another emerging trend is the integration of ESG considerations into corporate strategy and decision-making. Instead of treating ESG as a standalone function, companies embed sustainability principles into their core business operations, from product design to supply chain management. This integrated approach ensures that ESG considerations are aligned with overall business objectives and drive value creation across the organization.

Challenges and Opportunities

While the evolution of ESG priorities and metrics represents a positive step toward sustainable business, several challenges remain. One challenge is the lack of globally standardized metrics and reporting requirements, which can hinder comparability and credibility in ESG disclosure. Addressing this challenge requires collaboration among stakeholders to develop consistent and transparent reporting frameworks.

Another challenge is the need for greater accountability and oversight in ESG practices. As companies increasingly tout their sustainability commitments, there is a risk of greenwashing — the practice of making misleading or unsubstantiated claims about the environmental benefits of products or practices. To combat greenwashing, regulators, investors, and civil society organizations must hold companies accountable for their ESG claims and ensure transparency in reporting.

Despite these and other challenges, the evolving landscape of ESG presents significant opportunities for businesses to drive positive change and create long-term value. By embracing sustainability as a strategic priority, companies can enhance their resilience, competitiveness, and relevance in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.

What’s Next?

The evolution of ESG priorities and terminology reflects a broader shift toward sustainable business practices in the global landscape. As companies recognize the importance of addressing environmental, social, and governance factors, ESG is no longer viewed as a peripheral issue but a strategic imperative for long-term success. By aligning ESG priorities with meaningful outcomes and embracing transparency and accountability, businesses can contribute to a more sustainable — and potentially lucrative — future for all stakeholders.

However, the controversy surrounding ESG amid political turmoil underscores the complexity of sustainability challenges in a rapidly changing world. While ESG offers a framework for addressing environmental, social, and governance issues, it is only that — a framework. Its implementation is often intertwined with political dynamics that shape regulatory environments, stakeholder expectations, and business strategies, all of which can be open to interpretation on a national or regional level.

Yes, ESG is often a minefield for business leaders. Yet regulatory realities and the pressure from a public with increasing levels of climate anxiety require the conversation to take center stage — an uncomfortable position for C-Suite leaders to find themselves in.

Navigating these complexities calls upon companies to remain vigilant, adaptable, and conscientious in their approach to ESG. Businesses can navigate social turbulence by engaging with stakeholders, advocating for supportive policies, and upholding ethical standards while advancing meaningful progress toward sustainability goals. Ultimately, regardless of what the process is called, ESG remains a powerful tool for driving positive change in the face of political uncertainty, reinforcing the importance of sustainability as a shared global priority.

Finding a reasonable and impactful path forward is not easy, but not finding any path at all is no longer an option.

The post Whether You Like the Name or Not, ESG is Here to Stay appeared first on Medika Life.

The Significance of New York Climate Week

New York Climate Week, hosted by the Climate Group in collaboration with the United Nations and other partners, serves as a platform for governments, businesses, and civil society to showcase their commitments to climate action. Since its inception, the event has played a crucial role in galvanizing global efforts to combat climate change, with leaders announcing ambitious pledges and initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and foster sustainability.

One of the critical features of Climate Week is the Climate Week NYC Hub, a series of events and workshops focused on various aspects of climate action, from renewable energy to sustainable finance. This hub serves as a melting pot of ideas and solutions, fostering stakeholder collaboration and innovation.

The Intersection of Climate and Politics

The intersection of climate and politics becomes particularly pronounced in an election year. Political leaders are not only under pressure to address the pressing issues of the day but also to appeal to their voter base and secure reelection. This dynamic can influence the discourse surrounding climate action, potentially shaping the outcomes of events like New York Climate Week.

However, the politicization of climate change poses a significant challenge to meaningful progress. Partisan divides can sometimes hinder bipartisan cooperation on sustainability policies, leading to gridlock and a failure to build any meaningful momentum. Additionally, short-term political goals may take precedence over long-term environmental objectives, undermining the urgency of climate action.

The seemingly endless push and pull between what the environment demands at this moment and moving forward and what policymakers are willing to agree on may prove disastrous if we cannot collectively overcome bad-faith actors and engage in solutions-oriented negotiations on common, fact-centered ground.

The Role of Leadership

Despite these challenges, political, social, and corporate leadership remains crucial in driving sustainability policy forward. Political leaders can set the agenda, prioritize climate action, and mobilize resources to support renewable energy, conservation efforts, and other sustainability initiatives.

Moreover, corporate leaders are pivotal in advancing sustainability goals through corporate social responsibility initiatives, supply chain management, and investment in clean technologies. By aligning their business practices with environmental stewardship, companies can contribute to a more sustainable future while enhancing their reputation and competitiveness in the market.

The Role of Corporations

Corporations wield significant influence in the fight against climate change, given their economic power, resources, and ability to drive innovation. Their participation and engagement during New York Climate Week can significantly contribute to the success of the event and the advancement of sustainability goals. Corporate communications, in particular, can play a crucial role in amplifying the impact of Climate Week initiatives and fostering collaboration among businesses, governments, and civil society. Here’s how corporations and their communication strategies can make Climate Week a success:

1. Demonstrating Commitment to Sustainability

Corporate participation in New York Climate Week sends a powerful commitment to sustainability and climate action. By showcasing their initiatives, achievements, and commitments to reducing carbon emissions, conserving natural resources, and promoting renewable energy, corporations can inspire others to follow suit. Whether through keynote speeches, panel discussions, or interactive exhibits, companies can use Climate Week to highlight their sustainability efforts and demonstrate leadership in addressing climate change.

2. Sharing Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Climate Week allows corporations to share best practices, lessons learned, and success stories in sustainability. Through workshops, roundtable discussions, and networking events, businesses can exchange knowledge and expertise on energy efficiency, carbon management, supply chain sustainability, and circular economy initiatives. By sharing insights and collaborating with peers, corporations can accelerate progress toward common sustainability goals and drive collective action.

3. Engaging Stakeholders and Building Partnerships

Corporate communications are crucial in engaging stakeholders and building partnerships during Climate Week. Through strategic messaging, storytelling, and outreach efforts, companies can effectively communicate their sustainability priorities, values, and achievements to employees, customers, investors, and the broader public. By fostering transparency and dialogue, corporations can build trust and credibility, strengthen stakeholder relationships, and cultivate a supportive ecosystem for climate action.

4. Mobilizing Resources and Driving Innovation

Corporations have the resources and expertise to drive innovation and scale up solutions for climate change. During Climate Week, companies can announce new investments, partnerships, and initiatives to advance sustainability goals, such as renewable energy projects, green technology innovations, and sustainable supply chain initiatives. By mobilizing financial resources, technical expertise, and market influence, corporations can catalyze innovation and accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy.

5. Advocating for Policy Change and Collective Action

Corporate communications can also play a role in advocating for policy change and collective action on climate issues. Companies can advocate for supportive policy frameworks, incentives, and regulations that promote sustainability and drive investment in clean energy and climate resilience by engaging with policymakers, industry associations, and advocacy groups. Through public advocacy campaigns, thought leadership initiatives, and corporate lobbying efforts, corporations can leverage their influence to shape public policy and drive systemic change.

The Power of Collective Action

At its core, New York Climate Week is about collective action. It brings together stakeholders from diverse backgrounds and perspectives, united by a common goal: to address the climate crisis and build a more sustainable world. Through collaboration and dialogue, participants can identify shared challenges and opportunities, forge partnerships, and catalyze change at scale.

Moreover, the outcomes of New York Climate Week can extend far beyond the event itself. Pledges made and initiatives launched during the week can inspire further action and investment, both at the local and global levels. By amplifying the voices of leaders committed to climate action, Climate Week has the potential to mobilize public support and pressure policymakers to prioritize sustainability policy.

The Role of Public Engagement

Public engagement is also critical in driving momentum for sustainability policy. Citizens can hold their elected officials accountable, advocate for climate-friendly policies, and support businesses prioritizing environmental responsibility. Grassroots movements, youth activism, and community-led initiatives can all significantly shape the political landscape and drive meaningful change.

Monitoring the critical conversations at Climate Week can be a challenge for the concerned individual citizen, but finding a non-profit or advocacy organization to align with either in a membership capacity or even to follow on social media and receive updates may provide a more complete picture of how the sustainability conversation is being framed.

In an election year, the power of the electorate to influence policy outcomes is especially pronounced. By demanding action on climate change and making sustainability a top priority at the ballot box, voters can send a clear message to policymakers about the importance of environmental stewardship. Staying informed is critical.

COP v. Climate Week: Global Gatherings with Very Different Tenors

New York Climate Week is just one of the significant global gatherings focused on climate on the calendar. COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, will happen shortly after the United States elections in November. While New York Climate Week and the Conference of the Parties (COP) bring together global stakeholders to address climate change, they differ in scope, format, and objectives. Understanding these distinctions is essential for assessing how New York Climate Week may shift paradigms in the fight for sustainability policy, particularly as America chooses its next president.

1. Scope and Focus

COP conferences, organized by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), are large-scale international gatherings where countries negotiate and finalize multilateral agreements on climate change. These agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, set binding targets for greenhouse gas emissions reductions and establish frameworks for international cooperation on climate action.

In contrast, New York Climate Week is a more diverse and decentralized event, encompassing a wide range of stakeholders beyond national governments. While COP conferences primarily involve government representatives, Climate Week engages businesses, civil society organizations, and local governments, fostering a potentially more holistic approach to climate action.

2. Format and Structure

COP conferences follow a structured negotiation process, with formal plenary sessions, working groups, and side events focused on specific issues. These conferences culminate in adopting official documents, such as the COP decisions and the conference outcome reports, which serve as the basis for international climate policy.

New York Climate Week, on the other hand, features a more fluid and dynamic format, with various events, panel discussions, and workshops hosted by multiple organizations and stakeholders. While Climate Week lacks the formal decision-making authority of COP conferences, it provides a platform for networking, knowledge sharing, and collaboration, driving momentum for climate action at all levels.

3. Objectives and Outcomes

The primary objective of COP conferences is to negotiate and finalize international agreements on climate change, focusing on achieving consensus among participating countries. These agreements often set long-term targets and timelines for emissions reductions and mechanisms for financial assistance and technology transfer to support developing countries in their climate efforts.

In contrast, the objectives of New York Climate Week are more diverse and multifaceted. While the event aims to showcase commitments and initiatives from various stakeholders, its ultimate goal is to mobilize action and catalyze momentum for climate solutions. The outcomes of Climate Week may include new partnerships, initiatives, and pledges, as well as increased public awareness and engagement on climate issues.

4. Political Context

Another key difference between New York Climate Week and COP conferences is the political context in which they occur. While the UNFCCC process governs COP conferences and involves formal negotiations among countries, Climate Week takes place in a broader political landscape shaped by national and regional dynamics.

In an election year, the political context surrounding New York Climate Week may be particularly significant as policymakers seek to demonstrate leadership on climate issues to their constituents. However, participating countries’ domestic political priorities may influence the ambition and commitment they bring to the event.

As New York Climate Week approaches, the stakes remain high. Amid an election year, the event has the potential to catalyze momentum for sustainability policy, but it also faces challenges posed by political polarization and short-term thinking. Nevertheless, the power of collective action, leadership, and public engagement is a proven combination that gets results. We can build a more sustainable future for future generations by coming together to address the climate crisis. As individuals, businesses, and governments, we all have a role in moving the needle toward a more sustainable world.

The post New York Climate Week in an Election Year appeared first on Medika Life.

In the last year, we’ve seen the introduction of augmented or artificial intelligence systems like ChatGPT, Midjourney, and a litany of others. Across the globe, there’s been enthusiastic uptake of AI technology in all business models. From finance to journalism, manufacturing to big tech, organizations globally integrate AI into their regular operations and market it heavily to consumers and business partners. It’s a stamp of modern thinking and an ability to stay with the curve, if not ahead of it. We’re told it’s the wave of the future.

The health industry is no exception, and there’s theorizing that AI could have a role to play in nearly every aspect of the patient and provider experience, making some currently burdensome activities more efficient or optimizing straightforward medical procedures. There has also been considerable discussion around what role AI can take in mental health care, with some going so far as to predict that AI chatbots will eventually supplant human therapists and counselors as the preferred care delivery mechanism.

That should raise some red flags.

Namely, the possibility now exists for a two-tiered system based on economic, employment, or insurance status. Imagine a scenario where someone is employed full-time with limited insurance benefits or high out-of-pocket costs. If they struggle with their mental health, they look at their options, and if the insurance company determines it’s cheaper to cover the cost of therapy via AI chatbot, the option to speak to a real human being might be off the table.

Conversely, someone with excellent benefits or sufficient resources to pay out-of-pocket for mental health care could access a real person instead of speaking to a computer program.

Should that divide occur, we have created a system whereby the well-off have access to a level of mental health care that’s unavailable to those of limited means.

One of the hallmarks of many varieties of mental illness — particularly depression and social anxiety disorders — is isolation. As a society, we still struggle to overcome the stigma around mental illness, which drives some to hide from others, sometimes in plain sight. Other times, the nature of the disease itself causes the individual to withdraw. In either case, a back-and-forth with an AI chatbot, no matter how sophisticated, might prove insufficient.

AI mental health care has a part to play, assuming it can be provided at low or no cost and can be relied upon to serve clients adequately; some quality mental health care is better than none. That being said, we must be careful to keep our enthusiasm for new technology from clouding our view such that we lose sight of the most important thing: health is about people.

There are undoubtedly clear use cases that make sense. Using AI mental health chatbots to triage patients, help those in less immediate danger of slipping into crisis, or provide surface-level or generic advice on practicing mindfulness or performing deep breathing exercises, for example, is an excellent use of the technology. But for those experiencing a crisis or suffering from a long-term or particularly acute condition, the connection that can be formed with another human being can be lifesaving.

Technology like AI should be leveraged to make the human experience better for all, not just for some. If we are thoughtful about the application of AI, it can indeed be transformative. However, handing the keys to someone’s mental health care wholesale carries more risk than we ought to be willing to bear. Human connection still matters, even in our increasingly digital world.

Suppose we keep that fundamental truth in mind. In that case, AI will become a tool in providers’ toolboxes, another way to provide streamlined and ongoing care to those who need it, regardless of economic position or life circumstance. Human-centered care must become and remain the watchword of the fragmented health ecosystem. People’s lives and well-being depend on it.

The post AI and Mental Health: Are We Building a Divided System? appeared first on Medika Life.

“Culture crushes innovation.”  Here, we must not point the finger of blame for the dysfunctional health ecosystem at physicians, nurses and allied health professionals on the hospital floor.  Healers want to heal as much as those who need their help seek answers and solutions. The shared problem is not how to utilize this “hot” evolving technology but are we prepared to make the investment in time and training!  Time to input (usable) data into EMRs and learning technologies that can sort and “scrape” through and highlight information to accelerate clinical decision-making. 

Using AI to Reject Patient Claims and Care

One part of the challenge is understanding how to cognitively maximize and explore vast amounts of information is another. The other is to come to agreement in how AI can and cannot be used ethically and responsibility. As we saw recently, a nascent AI system must not be used by major health insurance companies to deny patients coverage for medicines and procedures.

While the “system” is resistant to significant change and science has become politicized and misunderstood, we must rally to the dual-goal of saving lives and reducing costs.  Can information technologies and “intelligent health systems” do what people in power have not achieved?  Are we able to educate consumers about being partners in data security? Can information bring people – professionals and consumers – together and transform this country’s post-WWII build health system? Yes!

Cardiologist Eric Topol, MD, reflects on the tension between patient care and AI in a Time Magazine interview about his bestselling book Deep Medicine:

“AI will always need human backup. A machine could handle certain things autonomously–diagnosing a skin rash, for example. Doctors shouldn’t be dealing with things that machines will do better than them. But serious conditions, like getting a cancer diagnosis, are what doctors should be working on. I think once patients understand that there are things they don’t need doctors to do, they would love it–once they get used to it.”

Many health professionals (and patients) are understandably wary! In one Medscape interview a physician shared this experience:

“We’ve played around with it. It was very early on in AI and we noticed it gave us incorrect information with regards to clinical guidance,” said Monalisa Tailor, MD, an internal medicine physician at Norton Health Care in Louisville, Kentucky. “We decided not to pursue it further,” she said.

Don’t close the door on an evolving technology! Care professionals work within a system that hinges on economics – how the institution is paid and how it must cover costs.  What is to be done if the system cannot support the health professional’s efforts or make the best use of their training, abilities, energy and dedication?  What will happen as more and more health professionals ghost the provider system that they feel no longer addresses their emotional and economic needs? These are questions that must be addressed sooner than we think! AI is inescapable. It’s an evolutionary process that will improve – improve health professionals and care output – over time.

Perhaps the biggest question is whether we can wait to resolve all these questions while health costs soar and people risk dying from treatable illnesses.  We should already know that answer! If you’re living in the question, that’s great. One way to resolve your angst and uncertainty is to follow people – some pioneers and others pundits – who are also asking those questions, doing the necessary research and exploring sensible possibilities.

20 AI/ChatGPT Champions to Follow

It was a challenge to select only 20 influentials for this listing. There countless people writing, speaking and commenting about AI and ChatGPT. It’s a hot topic and “trendy.” This list is not about “trends” and it isn’t an exclusive roster of people. However, these people are key voices of influence at the frontlines of AI and ChatGPT and are boldly considering how the health sector will need to support and adapt to these technologies ethically. It is important to follow their social posts, speeches and writings. They are theorists, physicians and teachers. What they say and where they say it can inform your opinion and direction. Follow them and get smarter faster!

Acknowledgements

As always, thanks to my friend and Medika Life Founding Editor-in-Chief Dr. Robert Turner, and Cullen Burnell for their encouragement and suggestions, and to Carolyn Neugarten, Medika Life Editorial Assistant for her efforts in making this feature possible, and Tyler Mayers, whose expertise sharing content across social platforms makes important information widely accessible. Special appreciation to colleagues from numerous professional circles who shared their thoughts and contributed recommendations. Special acknowledgement to people who appeared on previous Medika Life Lists and continue on the path to improve the wellbeing of people and planet. These exemplary people are dedicated to improving people’s health and know their efforts will make a difference.

AI and ChatGPT are frightening to some and mysteries to others. Humanity must decide how to best deploy these evolving and “thinking” technologies. What to do next is a mindful choice in the hands of people, and must be for the sake of people.

Gil Bashe, Editor–in-Chief, Medika.Life

AI and ChatGPT Global Voices of Influence

Here is our Medika Life roster of 20 people to follow in alphabetical order; all-important voices – to track and learn from in the coming years We have included wherever available links to the social media platforms and bios.

Follow these Voices and Leaders of Influence – They are writing the future of how AI and ChatGPT will be essential to health care delivery.

Ran D. Balicer, MD

Dr. Ran D. Balicer, a public health physician, executive and researcher, serves as Chief Innovation Officer & Deputy-DG at Clalit – Israel’s largest health insurance organization, and is Founding Director of the Clalit Research Institute.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Regina Barzilay, MD

Dr. Regina Barzilay is a School of Engineering Distinguished Professor for AI and Health in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and a member of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Kirk Borne, PhD

Dr. Kirk Borne is a Data Scientist, providing thought leadership, global speaking, content creation, mentoring, training, and consulting activities in data science, machine learning, and AI across multiple disciplines.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Atul Butte, MD, PhD

Atul Butte, MD, PhD is the Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg Distinguished Professor and inaugural Director of the Bakar Computational Health Sciences Institute (bchsi.ucsf.edu) at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). 

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Lex Fridman, PhD

Lex Fridman, PhD, is a Russian-American computer scientist, podcaster, and artificial intelligence researcher. He is a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and hosts the popular Lex Fridman Podcast, a podcast and YouTube series.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Mo Gawdat, MBA

Mohammad “Mo” Gawdat is an Egyptian entrepreneur and writer. He is the former chief business officer for Google X and author of the bestselling business books Solve for Happy and Scary Smart – The Future of Artificial Intelligence and How You Can Save Our World.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

John Halamka, MD, MS

John D. Halamka, M.D., M.S., president of the Mayo Clinic Platform, was trained in emergency medicine and medical informatics, Dr. Halamka has been developing and implementing healthcare information strategy and policy for more than 25 years.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Eric Horvitz, MD

Microsoft’s Chief Scientific Officer and an early AI champion for health and medicine going back many years, Dr. Eric Horvitz is among the founders and funders of Stanford’s 100-year longitudinal study of the impact of AI on Society.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Daniel Kraft, MD

Daniel Kraft, MD, is a Stanford and Harvard-trained physician-scientist, inventor, entrepreneur, and innovator and is serving as the Chair of the XPRIZE Pandemic & Health Alliance. With more than 25 years of experience in clinical practice, biomedical research and health innovation.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Tom Lawry

A leading AI transformation advisor to health and medical leaders around the world. Lawry is the best-selling author of Hacking Healthcare – How AI and the Intelligent Health Revolution Will Reboot an Ailing System, former Microsoft National Director of AI and now the managing director of Second Century Tech LLC, and partner in Aspire Health Innovations.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Fei-Fei Li, PhD

Dr. Fei-Fei Li is the inaugural Sequoia Professor in the Computer Science Department at Stanford University, and Co-Director of Stanford’s Human-Centered AI Institute. She served as the Director of Stanford’s AI Lab from 2013 to 2018.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Berci Mesko, MD, PhD

Bertalan Meskó, PhD is known as “The Medical Futurist” and the Director of The Medical Futurist Institute analyzing how science fiction technologies can become a reality in medicine and healthcare. He holds a PhD in genomics and is an Amazon Top 100 author. 

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Mira Murati

Mira Murati is the Chief Technology Officer at OpenAI, and one of the most influential innovators in technology and AI. She oversees efforts to commercialize OpenAI products and improve them through human feedback. She serves on the leadership teams that developed the OpenAI ChatGPT and Dall-E systems.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Andrew Ng, PhD

Dr. Andrew Ng is a globally recognized leader in AI. He is Founder of DeepLearning.AI, Founder & CEO of Landing AI, General Partner at AI Fund, Chairman and Co-Founder of Coursera and an Adjunct Professor at Stanford University’s Computer Science Department.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

John Nosta

John Nosta is a cutting-edge thinker in the world of technology, science, medicine and innovation. He is a globally recognized among the foremost voices constantly pushing the envelope on how AI and ChatGPT will transform health settings and work flow. Nosta is non-stop power thinker (and contrarian) and has more than 500 articles published on innovation topics.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Tam C. Nguyen

Associate Professor Tam Nguyen has more than 20 years of working in clinical trials, health and medical research and research management sector including tertiary teaching hospitals, medical research institutes and universities across Australia. He is the co-editor of the recent book: AI in Medicine (Springer).

• LinkedIn

Ziad Obermeyer, MD

Ziad Obermeyer, MD, is the Blue Cross of California Distinguished Associate Professor of Health Policy and Management. He is a physician and researcher who works at the intersection of machine learning and health.

• Twitter

Brian Roemmele

Brian Roemmele is a scientist, researcher, analyst, connector, thinker and doer. Brian became an early adopter of AI and neural networks and pioneered Prompt Engineering technologies and techniques to understand and extract information from AI platforms.

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Mihaela van der Schaar, MD

Mihaela van der Schaar, MD, is the John Humphrey Plummer Professor of Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence and Medicine at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow at The Alan Turing Institute in London. In addition to leading the van der Schaar Lab, Mihaela is founder and director of the Cambridge Centre for AI in Medicine (CCAIM).

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

 Eric Topol, MD

Eric Topol, MD, is the founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute; Executive Vice President, Scripps Research; Professor, Molecular Medicine, Scripps Research; and the Gary and Mary West Endowed Chair of Innovative Medicine, Scripps Research. In many ways, Dr. Topol was he kindled that started the AI transformation with his more than 1,300 publications and bestselling books.

Dr, Topol appears last – alphabetically – on this Top 20 Voices in AI and ChatGPT to follow. His ideas and prodding the system, perhaps place him first!

• LinkedIn
• Twitter

Spot a broken link, typo, forgotten degree or name misspelled?

Oops! Apologies! While care has been taken in compiling this list and adding social media links, things go wrong or a name is misspelled or a link broken. Please do get in touch to address typos, amendments, or omissions by reaching gil.bashe@medika.life.

Thanks in advance and be healthy!

The post Medika’s Top 20 AI Voices to Watch. Follow These Experts as They Demystify AI and Its Future appeared first on Medika Life.

Twitch is a platform that provides content creators the opportunity to livestream video games, cooking, political commentary, travel, or anything else that the creator chooses, so long as it falls within the platform’s terms and conditions.

Twitch enters into an agreement with each of its partnered content creators, allowing them to monetize their channels and splitting the revenue received from subscribers who pay up to $24.99 per month to support their favorite streamers. This arrangement has been lucrative for Twitch, and content creators with large followings can make well into the high six figures annually, with the very top echelon pushing into seven figures in earnings. Many leverage their fame and reach into other lucrative opportunities for sponsorships or content creation on other platforms.

Cracking the Façade to Find an Ugly Reality

One of those enormously successful streamers is a 28-year-old named Kaitlyn Siragusa, better known by her Twitch handle, Amouranth. She’s one of several young women who have attracted vitriol and blowback from some corners of the internet and media for leveraging their appearance, sexuality, and charm as part of their online personality to make a living. Whether you agree with her persona and presentation or not, you can’t argue with her success. Siragusa pulls in a reported seven figures per month, Twitch being her primary platform.

But the reality is much darker.

Beyond the standard harassment that any woman in the public eye, particularly in the historically male-dominated world of gaming and streaming – sadly experiences, Ms. Siragusa revealed on a live stream on October 16^th that she’s not actually single, as she’s represented in the past. In fact, she’s married to her trafficker.

She’s alleged she’s a victim of labor trafficking, her husband forcing her to stream and create content – some of it risqué – against her will. Live on stream she showed text messages from her husband in which he threatens her with financial abuse and her pets with physical harm if she doesn’t comply and keep up the facade. She claimed he’s taken control of her finances and bank accounts and has physically broken the door to the room in which she streams so she can’t lock him out.

“I’m basically living in a fancy prison,” she said.

The recording of the stream has since been deleted.

Toxicity, Misogyny, and Liability

Fellow prominent Twitch streamers broadcast their support for Ms. Siragusa across their own social channels, but a vocal contingent of her community and other streamers, some with enormous reach, had a different perspective.

The issue, they said, wasn’t that she had been forced to entertain them against her will. The issue was that she pretended to be single when she wasn’t and because they’d been duped, they deserved refunds for all the money they’d spent supporting her.

Twitch is no stranger to controversy, but this time feels different. The company has banked millions of dollars from its partnership with Amouranth, but it seems clear that those profits were the direct result of exploitation and forced labor. Does Twitch, or any organization for that matter, have an obligation to the people from whose efforts the company profits?

I’m not an attorney, but it seems unlikely that there’s any legal exposure for Twitch or Amazon in this case. Siragusa is an independent contractor and thus has none of the myriad worker protections that those with employee status enjoy. Further, there’s been no indication that she told anyone at the company about her situation before she came forward publicly on her stream. The moral argument is more crucial in this case.

Twitch boasts up to 8 million unique streams every month. More than 31 million people visit the site or use the app every day. They employ more than 1800 people globally. It a dominant player in the streaming space.

What do you do as an industry leader when such an ugly situation comes to light on your platform and the response from certain corners of your customer base and creator community isn’t sympathy or support, but anger, misogyny, and victim-blaming? This is a question that cuts to the core of the kind of company Twitch wants to be, who they want to serve, and who they want to partner with as a business.

What Comes Next?

The easiest thing that Twitch, and by extension Amazon, could do would be to ignore the situation entirely, to put the onus on Ms. Siragusa to manage the crisis on her own. That’s not how a responsible organization behaves, but it wouldn’t be entirely unexpected.

Though there may not be a legal obligation for Twitch to investigate whether this is an isolated incident, could a conscientious organization really fail to do so? Can a company live with itself, and what price will it pay in the court of public opinion, if it does nothing or stays silent when entangled in something as ugly as this that its directly profited from?

If you’re a woman who works at Twitch, or who streams on the platform, how would you feel about an organization that’s historically done relatively little to stem harassment and toxicity and is now silent after this revelation by one of their partners? I might find myself questioning how many other prominent young women on the platform are being forced to work against their will.

I would argue that the time is now for some introspection, and an evaluation of how the platform incentivizes content creators and protects potentially vulnerable individuals. Children as young as 13 can stream on the platform, after all. Is there more that Twitch could be doing? Almost certainly.

These are uncomfortable questions that should concern an organization if they’re being asked by employees or business partners, and even if the microscope of public scrutiny hasn’t found Twitch or Amazon yet, it’s only a matter of time should other content creators on the platform come forward, inspired by Ms. Siragusa’s bravery.

You can’t be dedicated to responsible business practices only when it’s convenient. It requires getting your hands dirty when things get complex and messy, taking ownership, and showing leadership. You don’t need to have all the answers, but people know the difference between right and wrong. Make sure they know that your company does too.

Neither Twitch nor its parent company, Amazon, have to this point issued a statement on the matter.

Ms. Siragusa published a recent video announcing that her husband is “getting help” and that she has regained access to all her finances and accounts and is “seeking legal and emotional counsel.”

The post Amouranth, Twitch, Amazon, and the Unraveling of Compassion and Common Sense appeared first on Medika Life.

The challenges that our world faces are grim, immense, and numerous. From climate change threatening to irrevocably alter the habitability of our planet to the resurgence of fascism across the globe, from a still-churning global pandemic with new viral variants appearing regularly to overt racial injustice rearing its ugly head, there is no shortage of worldly problems that could drive even the most optimistic person to despair temporarily. But for those who are already struggling to keep their heads above the proverbial water, the burden can become too much to bear.

When even day-to-day life seems insurmountable, how can someone struggling to cope with the negativity in the world find the strength to carry on? How do you safeguard your mental health and well-being in a world that constantly threatens to chip away at it?

Strategically Disengage

For all its potential to bring us together, social media can also be a driver of negativity at a volume that few other mediums can match. Suppose you spend enough time on Twitter or Facebook. In that case, the respective algorithm of whatever platform you’re on will, at some point, inevitably surface something that might drive you deeper or heighten your anxiety. Similarly, staying glued to the news will overwhelmingly remind you only of what’s wrong in the world and can often create a feeling of helplessness in the face of its enormity. If you cannot tear yourself away, doom scrolling instead of sleeping, delete the apps. Silence the alerts. Turn off the television or computer. Focus on what’s right in front of you – your health, your family, and your friends.

Fight Small Battles, Achieve Small Victories

When it seems like you as an individual are incapable of changing the trajectory of society at large, it might be time to think smaller—volunteer for a cause you deem worthy. Become a mentor. Start or join a club centered around a favorite hobby. Do something small with a high chance of success that will increase your self-esteem and make you feel accomplished. Exercise control where you can and make a positive change that’s tangible and meaningful to you. Making a difference for others, your community, or yourself can narrow your focus and give you the perspective you need: you can make a difference, you can do good, and the world is better off for having you in it.

Share the Burden

Commiseration can be the best therapy. Finding like-minded individuals with whom you can openly and honestly converse can reduce feelings of isolation and helplessness. You’ve undoubtedly heard the old axiom they tell you in school, “Don’t be afraid to ask a question. If you want to ask it, odds are someone else does too.” The same is true when the world seems overwhelming. Though it may feel like it, you’re not the only one struggling. Despair comes for us all from time to time, and when it hits, conversing with someone with equal concerns, even if neither of you have solutions, can make a difference in your mental state. At a minimum, you’ll know you’re not alone.

Ultimately it comes down to control: what you can and can’t do. Focusing on what you can’t control, like the political machinations of megalomaniacs or the destructive potential of fossil fuel companies, can legitimately rock the stability of any conscientious person. Conversely, focusing on what you can control within your sphere of influence, however narrow or seemingly insignificant, can help you achieve the victories you need to keep going.

Find a reason to wake up and get out of bed tomorrow. The world can’t always provide that reason for you. Sometimes you need to create it yourself.

The post Carrying On in a World That Can Seem Beyond Repair appeared first on Medika Life.