I have a confession to make. My parents are paying for every cent of my college education: $220,000 or more over four years. I am supremely in their debt.

Sadly, I have no concept of what it truly represents. You could call me spoiled or ungrateful and I admit sometimes I am both of those. In this case, its similar to how, as Americans, we look at our $16.4 trillion deficit or at our 601 percent increase in medical spending over the last 30 years. We cringe and keep walking or spending. In fact, there is a lot that we can learn from the parallel ascent of tuitions and medical costs.

There are several problems with how we practice medicine. Part of the problem with medical care is that many consumers are too removed from the actual costs. Most people likely dont know that it can cost anywhere from $10,000 to $32,000 to give birth to a baby. People are generally given the bill for their medical care upon treatment, when it is too late to refuse or search for cheaper options.

Normally, competition and consumer choice lead to greater efficiency and better value for the consumer. Still, if consumers dont know the products true costs, then price competition cannot exist. With medical care, there is no direct incentive for consumers to push for more efficiency their insurers will cover it. Our hospital incentive system is also terrible. Doctors are commonly compensated for how many procedures and tests they prescribe and not based on successful outcomes or efficiency. The incentives say more is better, no matter what. The result of opaque costs and backward incentives is that we pay 250 percent more per person per year than does the average developed nation and we still have a lower life expectancy.

Our system of higher education suffers from the same fundamental issues. During the application process it is definitely easy to figure out the cost of tuition, but what about room and board, textbooks and transportation? And where does that $50,000 or more actually go? Does it fund things directly related to your concentration? Or does it go to obscure sports teams, random school conferences and lawn maintenance?

Isnt our education about getting an education and not all the random country-club frills our school can throw at us? Just like in medical care, the majority of consumers have no real incentive to push for efficiency and greater value. Upper-class students receive family funding. Lower- and middle-class students receive need-blind financial aid, apply for scholarships or are saddled with debt. Any individual in my generation who would be sufficiently worried about the college process to start a movement against tuition hikes generally decides that a better use of time would be to apply for a couple of extra scholarships or student loans. On campus, the only sustained movement to help with the student tuition burden is fighting for financial aid, but wouldnt it help more people to fight the tuition increases alone? Our apathy, or in some cases our misdirected action, is bleeding us dry.

Our rankings-obsessed incentive system does not help the matter either. The most influential college ranking system is the U.S News and World Reports annual list. According to an article by U.S News and World Report on its ranking methodology, academic quality factors such as faculty resources financial resources (and) alumni giving account for 35 percent of a schools score. There is no mention of a tuition cost-benefit valuation or any sort of efficiency rating. The ratings suggest that the more a school pays for random crap, the better the school. Weve seen how well that idea works in public education. This system stirs a veritable tuition arms race for any school, like Brown, that wants to stay near the top of the rankings, and it results in the nations massive long-term climb in tuition. If the current trend of an average annual price increase of 4.4 percent at Brown continues, then a Brown education will cost over $70,000 per year by 2026. Hurray.

So what solutions do we have? I have two simple ideas that would at least help slow the increase in costs for both industries: Inform the consumer and change the industry incentives.

Multiple studies have shown that the more informed people are about their finances, the less they spend. The government should mandate that both industries reveal costs and future costs upfront. A good model would be like the information cards car dealerships display about gas consumption, smog ratings and ownership costs. If there were a measly 1 percent annual reduction in tuition or health care due to this mandate, it would still be a massive change.

Changing industry incentives would be much more difficult. The health care battles would, once again, be huge. There would have to be some sort of popular movement against current college ranking ideology. When either system becomes too broken, the public will come to the conclusion that these institutions must change their incentives and, ideally, there will be an improved system.

Go here to see the original:
Enriquez ’16: Let’s throw money at it

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., Feb. 12, 2013 /PRNewswire/ --Cannabis Science, Inc. (NASDAQ OTC: CBIS) has appointed Harold C. Smith, Ph.D., Professor in Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Oncology with secondary appointments as Professor in the Department of Genetics and Pathology and a Member of the Center for RNA Biology at the University of Rochester, School of Dentistry and Medicine, to the Company's Scientific Advisory Board. At the University of Rochester Dr. Smith directs a research laboratory and teaches undergraduate and medical school courses in biochemistry. He is a member of the RNA Society and a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He received the SUNY at Buffalo's Distinguished Alumni Award as well as several awards from the University or Rochester for contributions to the teaching mission and leadership in mentoring. Dr. Smith has been an opinion leader in RNA biology where he established the first Gordon Research conference on RNA Editing. Dr. Smith has also been the recipient of a number of grants, including grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the NIH, the United States Air Force, and the Office of Naval Research. In total, Dr. Smith has received federal and foundation research grants in excess of $6.5 million. Dr. Smith has been an opinion leader in RNA biology where he established the first Gordon Research conference on RNA Editing. Dr. Smith is the author of more than 100 peer-reviewed manuscripts and reviews during his career, exceeding more than 9,973 citations.

Dr. Smith received his Ph.D. from SUNY at Buffalo, following BS and MS degrees from Purdue University and an MA degree from SUNY at Buffalo. Dr. Smith also held post-doctoral positions in biochemistry at SUNY at Buffalo followed by three post-doctoral positions in biochemistry, pharmacology, and medical genetics, respectively, at Baylor College of Medicine.

In addition, Dr. Smith is the Founder and CEO of OyaGen, Inc., a biotech company in Rochester, New York developing novel therapeutics for infectious disease and cancer. OyaGen has raised in excess of $4 million from venture and angel investor sources and two federal grants for assay development.

Dr. Smith stated, "It is my pleasure to join the scientific advisory board of CBIS. In joining the Company's SAB, I hope to bring over 30 years of research experience in cancer and HIV to assist in developing a clear platform for the commercialization of CS-TATI-1 and CS-S/BCC-1. I look forward to assisting in the realization of bridging macro and microbiology in discovering new applications for the medicinalization of cannabinoids."

"We are honored to have Dr. Smith join the Scientific Advisory Board of Cannabis Science. Dr. Smith's broad experience in multidisciplinary biological research and professional development of therapeutics consistent with the goals of the Company make him a tremendously valuable addition to the Cannabis Science team, as we move forward in drug development," stated Robert Melamede, Ph.D., President and CEO of Cannabis Science.

About CS-TATI-1Cannabis Science's research of CS-TATI-1 will be targeted to newly diagnosed patients infected with drug resistant virus, treatment experienced patients with drug-resistant HIV strains, and those intolerant of currently available therapies. Cannabis Science will be pursuing a wide range of NIH based Federal Research Programs such as RO1's, PO1's and SBIRS which exist to support preclinical development of target validation and proof of concept studies. These studies will be implemented through collaborations with leading scientific institutions. Cannabis Science will also be pursuing other clinical research collaborations including the AIDS Clinical Trials Groups (ACTG), the Canadian AIDS Trial Network (CATN) and the European AIDS Trial Network (EATN).

About CS-S/BCC-1Cannabis Science is currently working to develop preclinical investigations of CS-S/BCC-1 treatment of basal and squamous cell carcinomas. The Company has begun preclinical investigations, which are being initiated in Europe for Squamous/Basal Cell carcinomas and Kaposi's sarcoma based on inhibition of carcinogenicity utilizing cannabinoids that have been demonstrated in recent studies to significantly affect tumor necrosis.

About Cannabis Science, Inc.Cannabis Science, Inc. is at the forefront of cannabinoid research and development for unmet medical needs. The Company works with leading experts in HIV drug development, medicinal characterization, and clinical research to develop, produce, and commercialize Phytocannabinoid-based pharmaceutical products.

Forward Looking StatementsThis Press Release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934. A statement containing works such as "anticipate," "seek," "intend," "believe," "plan," "estimate," "expect," "project," "plan," or similar phrases may be deemed "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Some or all of the events or results anticipated by these forward-looking statements may not occur. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include the future U.S. and global economies, the impact of competition, and the Company's reliance on existing regulations regarding the use and development of cannabis-based drugs. Cannabis Science, Inc. does not undertake any duty nor does it intend to update the results of these forward-looking statements.

Contact:

Follow this link:
Cannabis Science, Inc. Appoints Harold C. Smith, Ph.D., Professor in Biochemistry, Biophysics and Oncology and a ...

Interview by John A. Byrne

(Poets&Quants) -- If Columbia Business School Dean Glenn Hubbard were to advise his McKinsey-bound son on where to get his MBA, Hubbard says there are only four or five programs that he would recommend. He declines to mention the schools by name, but you can rest assured that Columbia would be on the list along with Harvard, Stanford, and Wharton. That leaves a lot of very good schools off the list.

Hubbard, dean of Columbia's business school since July 2004, is an economist by training. He joined Columbia in 1988, after beginning his teaching career at Northwestern. He was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George Bush and a top economic advisor to Mitt Romney during his recent presidential campaign.

In a wide-ranging interview with Poets&Quants, Hubbard discusses, among other things, the anxiety in MBA programs, whether Warren Buffett will become a donor, and Columbia's MBA application plunge last year, vastly exceeding downturns at other elite business schools.

Last year, applications to Columbia's MBA program fell by 19%, more than at any other top business school. How are things looking this year?

We are fortunate that our applications are up 9% year-over-year. What was weird about our drop is that it came along all at once. I told the faculty I felt like Wile E. Coyote, where he ran off the cliff and didn't know it yet. We had a couple of years where applications had plateaued and then all of a sudden crashed. But fortunately we are back up.

Your decline was generally attributed to Wall Street's troubles and the fact that Columbia's fortunes are so closely tied to Wall Street. Agree?

Wharton had a similar pattern. And if you were to do a trend line, we are both on that line. Harvard is above it. Harvard is the one school at the top where if you did a trend line pre-crisis and looked at applications, it's above it.

Do you think the decline is related to the belief that the value of the MBA degree has declined?

No. I think the value of the degree is still very high if you can go to a good school. If you go to any top business school, you will gain a skill set and mindset to make you a very good business leader. If you have in mind only an analytical job track, you might want to question the ROI. I think it's really hard to defend, at least in money terms, the value of an MBA beyond the top business schools.

See the original post:
Is an MBA worth it?

Milo ( | )

Milo the Lynx, the University of Colorado Denver's new school mascot, was introduced Thursday.

Named for a combination of the Mile High City and the campus' location near Lower Downtown, Milo will become a fixture, school officials say, not only at athletic events but in the university community as well.

The process for getting a mascot began during the 2011-12 academic year after the student body expressed interest. A mascot-development committee was formed, and CU Denver students, alumni, faculty and staff were given several opportunities via online and in-person surveys, focus groups and informal interviews to provide input on the mascot type, personality, name and visual identity.

While the CU Anschutz Medical Campus was involved in the selection process, Milo will represent only CU Denver. Milo now joins the university system's mascot heritage, which features Chip and Ralphie at the CU-Boulder campus, and Clyde the mountain lion for CU-Colorado Springs.

Excerpt from:
Milo the Lynx becomes new mascot for University of Colorado Denver

Jenna Mullins, who graduated from Auburn University at the age of 20, is seen Thursday at her home in Hokes Bluff. Mullins was enrolled in high school and Gadsden State at the same time and graduated from both the same year.

Not many 20-year-olds have a college alumni license plate holder. Jenna Mullins does.

Jenna, a 2010 graduate of Hokes Bluff High School and Gadsden State Community College, graduated in December from Auburn University.

She graduated from high school and the two-year college the same year, thanks to the dual enrollment program.

Jenna always excelled in school and began taking dual enrollment classes in ninth grade after her mother, Susan a former instructor at the school learned about it through a co-worker whose child, in school in another county, was doing dual enrollment.

She enjoyed school. I enjoyed the challenge, she said.

She was taking regular classes at Hokes Bluff. Instead of a taking an elective that had little impact, she decided to take the college classes. The school officials approved her request, and she began.

Jenna was taking some college courses before she could even drive. Her older brother, Matt, would take her there.

She also worked before she could drive, spending one summer at the Hokes Bluff ball fields, managing the concession stand.

It was the beginning of Jenna's senior year in high school when she first realized she had enough college credits to possibly graduate from community college at the same time as high school.

Original post:
Woman graduates Auburn at 20 thanks to dual enrollment