Yann LeCun, Metas outgoing chief AI scientist, says his employer tested its latest Llama model in a way that may have made the model look better than it really was.
In a recent Financial Times interview, LeCun says Meta researchers fudged a little bit by using different versions of Llama 4 Maverick and Llama 4 Scout models on different benchmarks to improve test results. Normally researchers use a single version of a new model for all benchmarks, instead of choosing a variant that will score best on a given benchmark.
Prior to the launch of the Llama 4 models, Meta had begun to fall behind rivals Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google in pushing the envelope. The company was under pressure to reassert Llamas prowess, especially in an environment where stock prices can turn on the latest model benchmarks.
After Meta released the Llama 4 models, third-party researchers and independent testers tried to verify the companys benchmark claims by running their own evaluations. But many found that their results didnt align with Metas. Some doubted that the models it used in the benchmark testing were the same as the models released to the public.
Ahmad Al-Dahle, Metas vice president of generative AI, denied that charge, and attributed the discrepancies in model performance to differences in the models cloud implementations.
The benchmark-fudging, LeCun said, contributed to internal frustration about the progress of the Llama models and led to a loss of confidence among Meta leadership, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
In June, Zuckerberg announced an overhaul of Metas AI organization, which included the establishment of a division called Meta Superintelligence Labs (MSL). Meta also paid between $14.3 billion and $15 billion to buy 49% of AI training data company Scale AI, and tapped Scales CEO, Alexandr Wang, to lead MSL. On paper, at least, LeCun, who won the coveted Turing Award for his pioneering work on neural networks, reported to the 28-year-old Wang.
LeCun told FTs Melissa Heikkilä that while Wang is a quick learner and is aware of what he doesnt know, hes also young and inexperienced. Theres no experience with research or how you practice research, how you do it. Or what would be attractive or repulsive to a researcher, LeCun said.
The division LeCun ran at Meta for a decade, FAIR (Fundamental Artificial Intelligence Research), was a pure research organization that picked its own areas of inquiry. An adjacent applied AI group worked closely with the lab to find ways to use the research in Metas own products.
But the organizational changes werent the only reason LeCun wanted to leave Meta. He has long expressed doubts that the current thrust of Metas AI researchlarge language modelswill lead to human-level intelligence because such models cant learn fast and continuously. LLMs can learn a certain amount about the world through words and images, but the models of the future will also have an understanding of the real world through physics.
And it’s those world models that LeCun hopes to invent at his new company, Advanced Machine Intelligence. LeCun will act as executive chair, which will allow him to spend much of his time doing research. Alex LeBrun, CEO of French healthcare AI startup Nabla, will become CEO of AMI.
Im a scientist, a visionary. . . . I can inspire people to work on interesting things, LeCun told Heikkilä. Im pretty good at guessing what type of technology will work or not.
When ChatGPT burst onto the scene, much of academia reacted not with curiosity but with fear. Not fear of what artificial intelligence might enable students to learn, but fear of losing control over how learning has traditionally been policed. Almost immediately, professors declared generative AI poison, warned that it would destroy critical thinking, and demanded outright bans across campuses, a reaction widely documented by Inside Higher Ed. Others rushed to revive oral exams and handwritten assessments, as if rewinding the clock might make the problem disappear.
This was never really about pedagogy. It was about authority.
The integrity narrative masks a control problem
The response has been so chaotic that researchers have already documented the resulting mess: contradictory policies, vague guidelines, and enforcement mechanisms that even faculty struggle to understand, as outlined in a widely cited paper on institutional responses to ChatGPT.
Universities talk endlessly about academic integrity while quietly admitting they have no shared definition of what integrity means in an AI-augmented world. Meanwhile, everything that actually matters for learning, from motivation to autonomy, pacing, and the ability to try or fail without public humiliation, barely enters the conversation.
Instead of asking how AI could improve education, institutions have obsessed over how to preserve surveillance.
The evidence points in the opposite direction
And yet the evidence points in a very different direction. Intelligent tutoring systems are already capable of adapting content, generating contextualized practice, and providing immediate feedback in ways that large classrooms simply cannot, as summarized in recent educational research. That disconnect reveals something uncomfortable.
AI doesnt threaten the essence of education: it threatens the bureaucracy built around it. Students themselves are not rejecting AI: Surveys consistently show they view responsible AI use as a core professional skill and want guidance, not punishment, for using it well. The disconnect is glaring: Learners are moving forward, while academic institutions are digging in.
What an ‘all-in’ approach actually looks like
For more than 35 years, Ive been teaching at IE University, an institution that has consistently taken the opposite stance. Long before generative AI entered the public conversation, IE was experimenting with online education, hybrid models, and technology-enhanced learning. When ChatGPT arrived, the university didnt panic. Instead, it published a very clear Institutional Statement on Artificial Intelligence framing AI as a historic technological shift, comparable to the steam engine or the internet, and committing to integrating it ethically and intentionally across teaching, learning, and assessment.
That all-in position wasnt about novelty or branding. It was grounded in a simple idea: technology should adapt to the learner, not the other way around. AI should amplify human teaching, not replace it. Students should be able to learn at their own pace, receive feedback without constant judgment, and experiment without fear. Data should belong to the learner, not the institution. And educators should spend less time policing outputs and more time doing what only humans can doguide, inspire, contextualize, and exercise judgment. IEs decision to integrate OpenAI tools across its academic ecosystem reflects that philosophy in practice.
Uniformity was never rigor
This approach stands in sharp contrast to universities that treat AI primarily as a cheating problem. Those institutions are defending a model built on uniformity, anxiety, memorization, and evaluation, rather than understanding. AI exposes the limits of that model precisely because it makes a better one possible: adaptive, student-centered learning at scale, an idea supported by decades of educational research.
But embracing that possibility is hard. It requires letting go of the comforting fiction that teaching the same content to everyone, at the same time, judged by the same exams, is the pinnacle of rigor. AI reveals that this system was never about learning efficiency, it was about administrative convenience. Its not rigor . . . its rigor mortis.
Alpha Schools and the illusion of disruption
There are, of course, experiments that claim to point toward the future. Alpha Schools, a small network of AI-first private schools in the U.S., has drawn attention for radically restructuring the school day around AI tutors. Their pitch is appealing: Students complete core academics in a few hours with AI support, freeing the rest of the day for projects, collaboration, and social development.
But Alpha Schools also illustrate how easy it is to get AI in education wrong: What they deploy today is not a sophisticated learning ecosystem, but a thin layer of AI-driven content delivery optimized for speed and test performance. The AI model, simplistic and weak, prioritizes acceleration over comprehension, efficiency over depth. Students may move faster through standardized material, but they do so along rigid, predefined paths with simplistic feedback loops. The result feels less like augmented learning, and more like automation masquerading as innovation.
When AI becomes a conveyor belt
This is the core risk facing AI in education: mistaking personalization for optimization, autonomy for isolation, and innovation for automation. When AI is treated as a conveyor belt rather than a companion, it reproduces the same structural flaws as traditional systems, just faster and cheaper.
The limitation here isnt technological: its conceptual.
Real AI-driven education is not about replacing teachers with chatbots or compressing curricula into shorter time slots. Its about creating environments where students can plan, manage, and reflect on complex learning processes; where effort and consistency become visible; where mistakes are safe; and where feedback is constant but respectful. AI should support experimentation, not enforce compliance.
The real threat is not AI
This is why the backlash against AI in universities is so misguided. By focusing on prohibition, institutions miss the opportunity to redefine learning around human growth rather than institutional control. They cling to exams because exams are easy to administer, not because they are effective. They fear AI because it makes obvious what students have long known: that much of higher education measures outputs while neglecting understanding.
The universities that will thrive are not the ones banning tools or resurrecting 19th-century assessment rituals. They will be the ones that treat AI as core educational infrastructuresomething to be shaped, governed, and improved, not feared. They will recognize that the goal is not to automate teaching, but to reduce educational inequality, expand access to knowledge, and free time and attention for the deeply human aspects of learning.
AI does not threaten education: it threatens the systems that forgot who education is for.
If universities continue responding defensively, it wont be because AI displaced them. It will be because, when faced with the first technology capable of enabling genuinely student-centered learning at scale, they chose to protect their rituals instead of their students.
It’s the first week of January, and you’re already drowning in Slack messages. You told yourself this year would be different, that you’d set boundaries and stop overcommitting. But here you are, saying yes to another meeting you don’t have time for, staying late to fix something that could wait, feeling that familiar knot in your stomach every Sunday night.
Across corporate America, 90% of employees are experiencing some level of burnout. For decades, weve been focusing on optimizing our physical health, tracking our sleep cycles, heart rate variability, while the part of us that actually drives our decisions at work, and quality of life, namely our beliefs and emotional patterns, remains almost entirely unmeasured.
We blame our schedules, download another meditation app, and tell ourselves we’ll feel better once we find the right morning routine.
But as companies prepare to spend $94.6 billion on wellness programs in 2026, it might be worth asking ourselves: What if we started to treat our minds as if they had capacity to improve instead of a crisis to manage?
To change the pattern of anxiety and overworking, we need systems that support us on an ongoing basis. The same kind of structure that gets us results in the gym. That means specific targets as opposed to vague intentions, with consistent practice and a way to measure whether anything’s actually shifting.
Awareness isnt the finish line
Most resources available focus on self-awareness, particularly our ability to notice unhelpful thoughts and identify our triggers. This can help you spot the problem, but it doesnt build the muscle to change it. When were under pressure, we are most likely to default to the identity weve rehearsed the most.
If we want different outcomes, we need to do different reps.
The ‘mental fitness’ framing
Physical training has three basics: assess, train, track. The inner version looks similar:
1. Assess the pattern, not the person
Swap Im bad at strategy for Under time pressure, I rush to solutions and skip framing. That tiny pivot turns character judgments into coachable behaviors.
2. Train one thing at a time
You wouldn’t walk into the gym and expect to have your desired physique by the end of the first session, so don’t try to reinvent yourself by Friday.
Pick one thing that actually matters at work, whether its staying calm when nothing is clear or deploying deliverables when theyre 80% done instead of polishing until it’s perfect. Then do it for two to four weeks, just that one thing.
3. Track signals you can observe
Pick leading indicators you can observe daily. Instead of asking “Am I better at communication?,” which measures the outcome, not the action, ask: “Did I pause for three seconds before responding in that tense Slack thread? Did I ask one clarifying question before jumping to solutions? Did I share context to help explain the reasoning behind my response?
A simple four-week protocol any team can use
In a culture obsessed with novelty, repetition can feel boring, but identity change is about repetition. The mind adapts through patterns, practicing a better version of yourself until it feels natural.
Week 0: Baseline
Write a short trigger map for the last two weeks at work. Note the situations that spark your worst habits (e.g., shifting scope, senior exec drop-ins, cross-team dependencies)
Choose one thing to train, naming the opposite habit youre replacing.
Weeks 12: Reps
Create a 90-second routine that cues your new identity, such as reading a one-line intention (My opinion matters and I will speak up when needed), breathing for four counts, or previewing one clarifying question youll ask.
Come up with three metrics to measure your progress with the new routine after encountering a trigger. For example, after facing a situation that would typically make you angry, ask: Did I pause before responding? Did I ask a clarifying question? Is there something I could have done better?
Week 3: Progressive overload
Add progressive overload. If you practiced in low-stakes meetings, maybe its time to bring the same behavior to a higher-visibility setting. If you trained with peers, try it with an exec.
Week 4: Review and lock in
Look back at your checkboxes. Where did the behavior hold under stress? Where did it collapse? Decide whether youd like to keep training this capacity for another block, or maintain it and choose a new one.
What managers can do this quarter
Leaders shouldnt be expected to fill the role of a coach to build mentally stronger teams. But they can make personal growth operational. This can look like:
Normalizing capacity goals. Alongside objectives and key results, ask reports to name one thing theyre training for the quarter and the two behaviors that prove its working. Review those behaviors in 1:1s like you would a KPI. The key is framing it as skill-building, not fixing what’s broken to avoid direct reports feeling judged.
Designing meetings for rehearsal so that, if someone is training concise communication, updates are time-boxed to 90 seconds. If another person is training direct feedback, they could be assigned devils advocate as a rotating role.
Praise the rep, such as: You paused, reframed, and asked the right question, rather than the persona (Youre a natural). Teams are more likely to repeat what gets recognized.
What this looks like in real life
A product lead I worked with had a familiar pattern. Whenever requirements changed late in a project cycle, someone from sales would promise a client a custom feature, or leadership would pivot strategy two weeks before launch, she’d panic. She’d call emergency meetings to “align everyone.” Then, to prove she had everything under control, she’d build massive 40-slide decks covering every possible scenario and spend 20 minutes walking through each one while her team’s eyes glazed over.
The meetings would drag on for an hour. People would leave more confused than when they arrived. Decisions took forever because there was too much information and no clear ask.
She picked one capacity goal: “Create clarity with fewer words,” and to implement it, she did two things: Ask one framing question at the start, and end meetings with a single-sentence summary.
Three weeks in, her team was making decisions faster because she changed the shape of conversations, starting with &8220;What decision are we trying to make today?” and ending with “So we’re moving forward with option B and revisiting the API integration next sprint.”
Performance improved because she trained smarter.
The quiet revolution
In the 1970s, jogging was not a thing. Then exercise transitioned from medical advice into identity as people became runners, not because a brochure said so, but because practice made them that kind of person.
Work is ready for a similar shift. We dont need more slogans about resilience. We need visible, repeatable ways to become the colleague, the manager, the builder we say we are.
Treat your inner game like your training plan: pick the capacity, run the block, count the reps. Your calendar wont change for you. Your identity will, one powerful repetition at a time.
Those with Attention Deficient Hyperactivity Disorder, better known as ADHD, often experience challenges that neurotypical people do not, such as distractibility or low frustration tolerance. However, there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that ADHD also has an upside. And, according to a new study, being aware of these positives may create some mental health perks.
The groundbreaking research, which was published in Psychological Medicine, comes from scientists at the University of Bath, King’s College London, and Radboud University Medical Center in the Netherlands. Researchers compared 200 adults with ADHD and 200 without in the first large-scale effort to measure psychological strengths associated with the disorder.
People with ADHD were actually more likely to strongly identify with 10 strengths, including the ability to hyperfocus, a sense of humor, creativity, intuitiveness, and having broad interests.
Overall, people with ADHD tested as having a lower quality of life than people without ADHD. However, the researchers also found that across both groups, people who understood their strengths and knew how to use them also had better mental health and well-being. From that lens, those with ADHDat least those who understand their personal strengths wellcould be primed for better mental health.
While those with ADHD are often well-versed in their struggles, such as difficulty concentrating, forgetfulness, emotional regulation challenges, or even trouble maintaining relationships, the new research puts a spotlight on the upsides of ADHD as well as the power of comprehending those strengths fully.
Luca Hargitai, lead researcher for the study and a postgraduate at the Department of Psychology at the University of Bath, says the research should help those with ADHD to understand their brains better. “It can be really empowering to recognize that, while ADHD is associated with various difficulties, it does have several positive aspects.”
Likewise, Dr. Punit Shah, senior author and Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Bath, says that the findings should be able to help researchers find real ways to improve the lives of people with ADHD. “The next step now is to investigate whether interventions that promote the recognition and use of personal strengths can offer tangible improvements in mental well-being for adults with ADHD.”
Your paycheck could be a little bigger in 2026, even if you didn’t get a New Year’s raise. That’s because, in order to adjust for inflation, the IRS made some major changes to the tax code last year.
In case you missed it, the changes were announced back in October. Notably, the standard deduction for 2026 (to be filed in 2027) — which reduces the amount of your income you will be taxed on — will rise. “For tax year 2026, the standard deduction increases to $32,200 for married couples filing jointly,” the October announcement explains. “For single taxpayers and married individuals filing separately, the standard deduction rises to $16,100 for tax year 2026, and for heads of households, the standard deduction will be $24,150.”
Experts say the change is likely to result in Americans saving money on their taxes. If the standard deduction increases, that means that they’re going to have a lower taxable income, which means that they’ll pay less taxes, Caroline Bruckner, the managing director of American Universitys Kogod Tax Policy Center said per The Independent.
New income thresholds
Another major change from the IRS is the income threshold for each of the seven federal income tax brackets, which are set to change, too. The highest tax bracket, for those who file individually, is now for incomes over $640,600, which will be taxed at a 37% rate. For married people filing jointly, the same is true for those earning over $768,700. That group is followed by the 35% bracket, which includes incomes over $256,225 for individuals and over $512,450 for married couples.
On the lower end of the spectrum, individuals and married couples earning at least $12,400 and $24,800, respectively, will be taxed at a 12% rate. The individual filers earning $12,400 or less will be taxed at a 10% rate. The same will be true for married couples filing jointly who earned $24,800 or less.
According to the Tax Foundation, changing tax bracket thresholds is not unusual. And, it’s important for combatting what’s known as “bracket creep” which happens when inflation is the root cause of pushing tax payers into higher tax brackets. That means, it could increase how much tax payers owe, without an increase in real income.
While the recent changes to 2025 tax brackets could boost your paycheck, they’re actually fairly modest when compared to recent years. In 2024, for example, for a single filer, the income threshold for the 10% bracket rose from up to $11,000 in 2023 to $11,600. For those married filing jointly, the threshold moved from $22,000 to $23,200. Likewise, the previous year, tax brackets changed by about 7% due to inflation.
Your paycheck could be a little bigger in 2026, even if you didn’t get a New Year’s raise. That’s because, in order to adjust for inflation, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) made some major changes to the tax code last year.
In case you missed it, the changes were announced back in October. Notably, the standard deduction for 2026 (to be filed in 2027)which reduces the amount of your income you’ll be taxed onwill rise. “For tax year 2026, the standard deduction increases to $32,200 for married couples filing jointly,” the October announcement explains. “For single taxpayers and married individuals filing separately, the standard deduction rises to $16,100 for tax year 2026, and for heads of households, the standard deduction will be $24,150.”
Experts say the change is likely to result in Americans saving money on their taxes. If the standard deduction increases, that means that they’re going to have a lower taxable income, which means that they’ll pay less taxes, Caroline Bruckner, the managing director of American Universitys Kogod Tax Policy Center, said per The Independent.
New income thresholds
Another major change from the IRS is the income threshold for each of the seven federal income tax brackets, which are set to change, too. The highest tax bracket, for those who file individually, is now for incomes over $640,600, which will be taxed at a 37% rate. For married people filing jointly, the same is true for those earning more than $768,700. That group is followed by the 35% bracket, which includes incomes over $256,225 for individuals and over $512,450 for married couples.
On the lower end of the spectrum, individuals and married couples earning at least $12,400 and $24,800, respectively, will be taxed at a 12% rate. The individual filers earning $12,400 or less will be taxed at a 10% rate. The same will be true for married couples filing jointly who earned $24,800 or less.
According to the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax policy nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., changing tax bracket thresholds is not unusual. And, it’s important for combating what’s known as “bracket creep,” which happens when inflation is the root cause of pushing taxpayers into higher tax brackets. That means it could increase how much taxpayers owe, without an increase in real income.
While the recent changes to 2025 tax brackets could boost your paycheck, they’re actually fairly modest when compared with recent years. For example, for a single filer, the income threshold for the 10% bracket rose from up to $11,000 in 2023 to $11,600 in 2024. For those married filing jointly, the threshold moved from $22,000 to $23,200. Likewise, the previous year, tax brackets changed by about 7% due to inflation.
How seriously are you taking your 2026 rebrand? Do you have your 365 buttons ready?
If this means nothing to you, you likely spent the holiday period at the lord intended – offline. But if spending less time on your phone isnt one of your 2026 resolutions, let me catch you up.
It started with a TikTok posted in December, all about rebranding for 2026. In the comments people shared their own strategies and self-improvement tips for the upcoming year. One comment, however, stood out from the rest.
Im getting 365 buttons, one for each day because I want to do more stuff and Im scared of time so I want to be more conscious of it, a user called Tamara wrote.
To which another user innocently asked: What is 365 buttons?
Tamara went on to explain: One for every day, to which another replied: Yes queen, but wdym buttons? Like to wear?
Tamara then clarified: Just to have to see how quick days pass and to remind myself that time passes and I just have fun and to do a lot of stuff.
Still confused? Youre not alone. What are you doing with the buttons everyday is what theyre asking, one user commented. Are you putting them in a jar, are you wearing them??
To this, Tamara responded: Hey so it actually only has to make sense to me for me to do it and I dont feel like explaining it to anyone else
What mightve remained an off-the-cuff interaction, instead blew up overnight with hundreds of videos since posted in reference to the comment exchange.
Some have made their best attempts to explain Tamaras logic (to my understanding a sort of sand timer, but in button-form). Others have taken Tamaras advice and started their own 365 button craft projects, from making their own brass buttons to upcycling clothing.
Kinda upset its already the third button but I don’t have to explain that to anyone, one creator posted on January 3rd. Only just now found out about 365 buttons so now i gotta wait til next year, another lamented this week.
Mostly, people have taken Tamaras words as a mantra or inspirational quote – complete with brat-esque graphics – to live by in 2026.
In much the same way Kylie Jenner prophetically proclaimed 2016 as the year of realizing stuff,” a decade on, in 2026 we can add to that axiom, it actually only has to make sense to me for me to do it and I dont feel like explaining it to anyone else.”
For Americans, the idea of watching live television without the constant barrage of commercials for prescription medications and junk food might seem foreign. Thats now the norm in the United Kingdom.
Starting on Monday, a ban has gone into effect that prohibits advertising foods high in fat, salt, and sugar on TV before 9 p.m. and at any time online. Its an attempt by the UK government to tackle childhood obesity. In 2022, 15% of children between the ages of 2 and 15 were obese, according to figures from the National Health Service.
What constitutes a banned product is a bit complex to decipher, as the rules cover 13 wide-ranging categories of food. Some products included in the advertising ban are obvioussoda, candy, potato chips, and desserts, for examplewhile others may be a bit surprising, like breakfast cereals, various types of yogurts, and ready-made meals like stuffed ravioli.
WELL OVERDUE
The UK has long banned TV advertisements for prescription drugs, and this latest advertising ban dates back to 2020, during the era of former Prime Minister Boris Johnson. However, it didnt receive much traction under his successor.
In 2023, now-Prime Minister Keir Starmer campaigned on reforming the National Health Service and promised to put a ban into effect on advertising junk food if elected, saying it was well overdue.
That sentiment was echoed more recently by Katherine Brown, a professor of behavior change in health at the University of Hertfordshire, who told the BBC on Monday that the ban was long overdue and a move in the right direction.
COMPLYING WITH BAN
But food companies are already finding creative ways to comply with the ban, while still advertising.
These companies can advertise healthier versions of banned products or they can continue to advertise online and on television, so long as they dont show an “identifiable” product. This latter concession was one the UK government made following threats of legal action by the food industry against the blanket ban.
Legislation permits companies to switch from product advertising to brand advertising, which is likely to significantly weaken [the] impact [of the new rules], Anna Taylor, executive director of The Food Foundation, a nonprofit focused on the UK food system, told The Guardian.
Whats more, companies are switching up how they advertise, opting instead for outdoor advertising that include billboards and on public transportation. Outdoor advertising is the second-largest source of exposure to food advertising for children, according to the 2025 annual report from The Food Foundation, and food companies increased their advertising spend by 28% between 2021 and 2024 in anticipation of the TV and online ban.
MORE TO BE DONE
While the UK government has estimated that the advertising ban could prevent about 20,000 cases of childhood obesity, theres more work to be done, according to advocates.
Brown called on the government to make nutritious options “more affordable, accessible and appealing,” while Taylor said the ban marked a milestone on a bigger journey to protect children.
We cant stop here, we must remain focused on the goal: banning all forms of junk food advertising to children, Taylor told The Guardian.
As today is the first Monday of 2026, Americans across the country are settling back into their everyday routines after the busy holiday season.
But many are also recovering from the fluor still suffering from it.
Flu illnesses are surging across the country. According to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), positive influenza test results reached the highest levels of the season for the week ending December 27, 2025.
The CDC publishes a weekly influenza surveillance report that details positive case counts, illness activity levels by state, and breakdowns of flu types.
Due to the winter holidays, the CDCs latest weekly report was delayed. But the agency published its findings today, January 5, 2026.
The report shows that 32.9% of samples tested positive for influenza. Positive influenza test results have continued to trend upwards in recent weeks.
Influenza A H3N2 Super Flu cases are surging nationwide
Fast Company previously wrote about the worsening spread of the so-called super flu. The most common influenza strain this season is the subclade K, which is a mutated version of H3N2, a subtype of the influenza A virus.
According to CDC data, for the week ending December 27, a total of 994 influenza viruses were reported by public health laboratories. Of those, 971 were influenza A and 23 were influenza B. Of the 600 influenza A viruses that were subtyped, 91.2% were influenza A H3N2.
For the same week, 33,301 patients were admitted to hospitals with influenza.
Meanwhile, two influenza-related pediatric deaths were reported. One death occurred the week ending December 20 and one death occurred the week ending December 27. A total of nine influenza-related pediatric deaths have been reported this season.
For the week ending December 27, activity levels were considered very high in more than half of the U.S. states. Activity levels were also very high in Puerto Rico.
Screenshot via CDC.
The states with the highest flu activity include:
Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
The CDC expects activity to continue for several weeks.
What are the symptoms of the flu?
Flu symptoms can vary from mild to severe. According to the CDC, these are the most common symptoms to be aware of:
Fever
Feeling feverish/having chills
Cough
Sore throat
Runny or stuffy nose
Muscle or body aches
Headaches
Fatigue (tiredness)
Possible vomiting or diarrhea
Its worth noting that not everyone with the flu gets a fever.
If youre experiencing flu-like symptoms, the CDC recommends limiting contact with others.
Total flu cases reach 11 million nationwide
The CDC estimates that at least 11 million flu illnesses have occurred so far this season. The agency estimates that there have been 120,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths from the flu.
The CDC recommends that everyone 6 months of age and older who has not yet been vaccinated this season get an annual influenza vaccine.
The Trump administration has added seven countries, including five in Africa, to the list of nations whose passport holders are required to post bonds of up to $15,000 to apply to enter the United States.
Thirteen countries, all but two of them in Africa, are now on the list, which makes the process of obtaining a U.S. visa unaffordable for many.
The State Department last week quietly added Bhutan, Botswana, the Central African Republic, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Namibia, and Turkmenistan to the list. Those designations took effect on Jan. 1, according to a notice posted on the travel.state.gov website.
It’s the latest effort by the Trump administration to tighten requirements for entry to the U.S., including requiring citizens from all countries that require visas to sit for in-person interviews and disclose years of social media histories as well as detailed accounts of their and their families’ previous travel and living arrangements.
U.S. officials have defended the bonds, which can range from $5,000 up to $15,000, maintaining they are effective in ensuring that citizens of targeted countries do not overstay their visas.
Payment of the bond does not guarantee a visa will be granted, but the amount will be refunded if the visa is denied or when a visa holder demonstrates they have complied with the terms of visa.
The new countries covered by the requirement join Mauritania, Sao Tome and Principe, Tanzania, Gambia, Malawi, and Zambia, which were all placed on the list in August and October of last year.
Matthew Lee, AP diplomatic writer
