Last night Sandvik Coromant, a global leading supplier of cutting edge tools, tooling solutions and know-how to the metalworking industry, lit up the Chicago skyline with insightful images designed to spread the word about the profound impact data and technology has on the manufacturing industry and people’s daily lives. The display also included inspirational images depicting the future of digital manufacturing created by Samuel and Erika Flickinger, a brother and sister from Decatur, IL. The two students, who participated in STEM education “Dream It. Do It.” summer camps created by The Manufacturing Institute, literally helped ‘flip the switch’ on the light show and also each received a $1,000 check toward their future education.
“Our goal with this light show was to raise awareness about the amazing opportunities that the use of data is driving in the manufacturing industry and honor two very creative students,” said Sean Holt, President Sandvik Coromant Americas. “We are proud to help raise awareness about the present and future opportunities of digital manufacturing, including the skilled and high paying career options for future generations.”
To view the multimedia release go to:
http://www.multivu.com/players/English/7833454-sandvik-coromant-manufacturing-technology-show/
When IIHS began its booster seat ratings in 2008, most models failed to consistently provide good belt fit — the main purpose of a booster. This year, all new models evaluated by the Institute provide good or acceptable fit for typical 4 to 8 year-olds in most cars, minivans or SUVs.
Out of 23 new models evaluated, 20 earn the highest rating of BEST BET, meaning they are likely to provide good fit for a 4- to 8-year-old child in almost any car, minivan or SUV. Another three models are rated GOOD BETs, meaning they provide acceptable fit in most vehicles. There are no new models in the Not Recommended category, nor are there any with the Check Fit designation, which identifies seats that may work for some children in some vehicles.
Adults have gotten the message that it’s safer for kids to ride in the back seat properly restrained, but when it comes to their own safety, there is a common misperception that buckling up is optional. Among adults who admit to not always using safety belts in the back seat, 4 out of 5 surveyed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety say short trips or traveling by taxi or ride-hailing service are times they don’t bother to use the belt.
The new survey reveals that many rear-seat passengers don’t think belts are necessary because they perceive the back seat to be safer than the front. This shows a clear misunderstanding about why belts are important, no matter where a person sits in a vehicle.
Before the majority of Americans got into the habit of buckling up, the back seat was the safest place to sit, and the center rear seat was the safest place of all in 1960-70s’ era vehicles. In recent decades, high levels of restraint use, the advent of belt pretensioners, load limiters and airbags, plus crashworthy vehicle designs have narrowed the safety advantages of riding in the rear seat for teens and adults.
Drivers of vehicles with good small overlap front ratings from the Insurance Institute from Highway Safety can expect to be protected well in a frontal crash involving the left corner of the vehicle. But how would the passengers sitting next to them fare in a right-side small overlap crash? A new study shows that good protection doesn’t always extend across the front seat.
The Institute conducted 40 mph passenger-side small overlap tests on seven small SUVs with good driver-side small overlap ratings. Only one of the vehicles, the 2016 Hyundai Tucson, performed at a level corresponding to a good rating, and the others ran the gamut from poor to acceptable.
The results have prompted IIHS to consider instituting a passenger-side rating as part of its TOP SAFETY PICK criteria.
To view the multimedia release go to:
http://www.multivu.com/players/English/7856251-ad-council-embrace-refugees/
The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS) today announced it has committed $40.3 million in new research investments to advance the most promising blood cancer science at leading academic and medical centers around the world, including Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston; Weill Cornell Medicine and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York; MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston; Fondazione Centro San Raffaele in Milan; and South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute in Adelaide.
This $40.3 million investment, comprised of 75 new research grants in LLS’s portfolio of 300 projects, will fund a diverse array of research to find better treatments and cures for patients with leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma and other blood cancers.
To view the multimedia release go to:
http://www.multivu.com/players/English/7554855-lls-invests-millions-new-research-treatment-cures/
Federally funded research continues to spur progress against cancer; however, accelerating the pace of progress will require robust, sustained, and predictable annual funding increases for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, strong financial support for the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative is required, according to the sixth annual American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Cancer Progress Report, released today.
One of the most exciting new approaches to cancer treatment is cancer immunotherapy. As detailed in the report, the utility of immunotherapy is expanding rapidly. For example, on Aug. 1, 2015, one class of immunotherapeutics, checkpoint inhibitors, was initially approved for just two types of cancer—melanoma and lung cancer. As of Sept. 1, 2016, checkpoint inhibitors have been approved for treating six types of cancer—bladder cancer, head and neck cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma, kidney cancer, lung cancer, and melanoma.
To view the multimedia release go to:
http://www.multivu.com/players/English/7911951-aacr-2016-cancer-progress-report/
A new online resource is now available to help people recognize and find high quality care for alcohol use disorder, which affects more than 15 million adults in the United States. The Alcohol Treatment Navigator, designed by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), part of the National Institutes of Health, is a comprehensive, yet easy-to-use tool to help individuals and their loved ones navigate the often-complicated process of choosing treatment for alcohol problems. With many treatment options available, the navigator makes the search easier by telling them what they need to know - and what they need to do – to find appropriate, quality care.
“We developed this tool to help address the alcohol ‘treatment gap,’” said NIAAA Director George F. Koob, Ph.D. “In any given year, less than 10 percent of individuals diagnosed with alcohol use disorder receive treatment, and many of them do not receive the type of care that best fits their needs. A big reason for that, we believe, is that people with alcohol use disorder often don’t know where to turn for help. The Alcohol Treatment Navigator offers a comprehensive strategy to help people search for professionally-led, evidence-based alcohol treatment, which should improve their chances for success.”
To view the multimedia release go to:
https://www.multivu.com/players/English/8179051-niaaa-alcohol-treatment-navigator/
The number of vehicles earning either of two awards from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has jumped to 71 from 39 this time last year, giving consumers more choices for optimum protection in crashes. The number of winners in the top tier — TOP SAFETY PICK+ — has increased by 11 for 2015, despite a tougher standard for front crash prevention.
While the bar has been raised for TOP SAFETY PICK+, the criteria for TOP SAFETY PICK are unchanged from 2014: a good or acceptable rating in the challenging small overlap front test and a good rating in each of the Institute's four other crashworthiness evaluations — moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraints. The 2015 TOP SAFETY PICK+ designation is awarded to vehicles that meet those criteria and also have an available front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating.
A new crash test program from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety aims to ensure that manufacturers pay attention to the safety of front passengers as well as drivers.
The test was developed after it became clear that some manufacturers were giving short shrift to the right side of the vehicle when it comes to small overlap front crash protection. A good or acceptable passenger-side rating will be required to qualify for the Institute’s 2018 TOP SAFETY PICK+ award.
The first test group in the passenger-side small overlap front test program did better overall than vehicles IIHS previously evaluated for research. Ten out of 13 midsize cars tested earn a good rating, while one is acceptable and two earn a marginal rating.
In contrast with a group of 2014-16 model small SUVs tested for research, none of the 2017-18 midsize cars had a poor or marginal structural rating. Instead, the biggest problem in the new group was inconsistent airbag protection in five cars, which would put passengers’ heads at risk.
Not a single small SUV out of 21 tested earns a good rating in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s headlight evaluations, and only four are available with acceptable-rated headlights.
Among the 21 vehicles, there are 47 different headlight combinations available. More than two-thirds of them are rated poor, making this group of vehicles even more deficient when it comes to lighting than the midsize cars that were the first to be rated earlier this year.
Headlight performance in today’s vehicles varies widely. Government standards are based on laboratory tests, which don’t accurately gauge performance in real-world driving. The issue merits attention because about half of traffic deaths occur either in the dark or around dawn or dusk.
As with midsize cars, the IIHS evaluations of small SUVs showed that a vehicle’s price tag doesn’t correspond to the quality of headlights. More modern lighting types, including high-intensity discharge (HID) and LED lamps, and curve-adaptive systems, which swivel in the direction of steering, also are no guarantee of good performance.
Less than a year into a new Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ratings program for front crash prevention, auto manufacturers are making strides in adopting the most beneficial systems with automatic braking capabilities and are offering the features on a wider variety of models. Twenty-one of 24 cars and SUVs, all 2014 models unless noted, earn an advanced or higher rating in the latest round of IIHS evaluations.
Three more midsize SUVs achieved good or acceptable ratings from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in the latest round of small overlap front crash testing, but many models, including three newly rated SUVs from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and one from Hyundai, continue to struggle with the test.
