Lauren J.

Lauren J. Young is an associate editor for health and medicine at Scientific American. She has edited and written stories that tackle a wide range of subjects, including the COVID pandemic, emerging diseases, evolutionary biology and health inequities. Young has nearly a decade of newsroom and science journalism experience. Before joining Scientific American in 2023, she was an associate editor at Popular Science and a digital producer at public radio’s Science Friday. She has appeared as a guest on radio shows, podcasts and stage events. Young has also spoken on panels for the Asian American Journalists Association, American Library Association, NOVA Science Studio and the New York Botanical Garden. Her work has appeared in Scholastic MATH, School Library Journal, IEEE Spectrum, Atlas Obscura and Smithsonian Magazine. Young studied biology at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, before pursuing a master’s at New York University’s Science, Health & Environmental Reporting Program. Public HealthJune 5, 2024 New ‘FLiRT’ COVID Variants Could Be Driving an Uptick in Cases. Here’s How to Avoid Them

Biography:  https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/lauren-j-young/

68%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermines the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
Analysis.OverallConflictOfInterestScore * 0.3F + Analysis.OverallBiasScore * 0.3F + Analysis.DeceptivenessScore * 0.3F + Analysis.ReadabilityScore * 0.1F

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

The Daily's Verdict

This author has a mixed reputation for journalistic standards. It is advisable to fact-check, scrutinize for bias, and check for conflicts of interest before relying on the author's reporting.

Bias

0%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Conflicts of Interest

100%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Contradictions

85%

Examples:

  • A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine on May 29 showed the XBB.1.5 vaccine reached 52 percent effectiveness against infection after four weeks, then immunity began to wane.
  • COVID deaths were down from the previous fall-winter season in 2022 to 2023 but were still worse than flu: those hospitalized with COVID had an approximately 35 percent higher risk of death.
  • Versions of the COVID vaccines that target the XBB.1.5 variant are available, and those who are age 65 and older or immunocompromised are eligible to receive an additional shot if they already received one in the fall of 2023.

Deceptions

100%

Examples:

No current examples available.

Recent Articles

New COVID-19 Subvariants KP.2 and KP.3: Concerns of Potential Rise in Cases as Summer Approaches

New COVID-19 Subvariants KP.2 and KP.3: Concerns of Potential Rise in Cases as Summer Approaches

Broke On: Monday, 03 June 2024 As COVID-19 cases potentially rise with new subvariants KP.2 and KP.3 of the Omicron variant, health experts urge increased vigilance, especially as wastewater surveillance programs show increasing SARS-CoV-2 levels. The upcoming fall vaccine is expected to provide protection against these novel variants and their subvariants.