Keep insulin safe in monsoon

By Nabiha Khalid A specific sort of discomfort falls over a newsroom when the instruments of the profession begin to surpass the ethical standards intended to regulate them. Artificial intelligence is now capable of creating text, images, and videos that are indistinguishable from genuine human creations, and the consequences of this change are far from straightforward. When a false quote can be convincingly linked to a public figure, or when a deepfake video can spread more swiftly than any correction can be issued, the very core of journalistic integrity the assumption that reported facts reflect what has truly happened faces significant pressure. This is not an imagined crisis; it is the current reality in modern media. I attened a workshop under the project titled “Digital Trust and Free Expression in the AI Era” at the Department of Media and Development Communication, University of the Punjab, supported by the U.S. Mission to Pakistan in partnership with the Pakistan-U.S. Alumni Network (PUAN) last week and we discuused in the wrodkshop that what ethical journalism requires in today’s context cannot depend solely on instinct. Verification must be a systematic process rather than something that happens by chance, involving a discipline of cross-checking, sourcing from multiple angles, and being technically adept at identifying manipulated media. Fact-checking, which used to be a background activity conducted before publication, must now be approached as a clear, continual practice that news consumers can observe and rely on. The difference between accurate reporting and unintentionally spreading misinformation often hinges on this one consistent habit of verification, applied uniformly rather than selectively. It is equally important to emphasize responsible digital storytelling, understanding that journalists do not just deliver information but are guardians of public knowledge. In an information landscape dominated by AI, the journalist’s role evolves slightly: from being the first to break news to becoming the most trustworthy source to verify it. This shift does not imply a lesser role; rather, it could very well be the most crucial aspect of journalism in the coming years. It is important to place this change in a broader historical context. Journalism has endured disruptive technologies in the past the telegraph shortened distances, the around-the-clock news cycle diminished patience, and social media altered the role of gatekeeping, enabling anyone with a smartphone to share information. Each disruption brought about its own ethical challenges, and each time, the industry persisted not by opposing the technology but by creating new standards to regulate it. Artificial intelligence is the newest and possibly the most significant example of this trend. What sets it apart from previous disruptions is the remarkable realism of synthetic content: earlier types of misinformation needed some level of narrative development, whereas AI can now generate the very evidence needed an image, a voice, a document ,Journalism has long relied on certain standards as evidence. This brings up a difficult yet essential question: can the technologies that jeopardize trust in journalism also aid in its restoration? The answer, with caution, is affirmative. News organizations are increasingly utilizing AI-assisted verification tools, reverse-image analysis, and metadata forensics to combat the misuse of these very technologies. This dual nature of AI serving both as a threat and a tool indicates that ethical journalism today necessitates a level of technical knowledge that was not mandatory a decade ago but has now become crucial. A journalist who lacks training in identifying the distinctive markers of synthetic media is, in a significant way, not adequately equipped for the current landscape. Additionally, there is a less obvious yet significant challenge to address: the imbalance between the rapid production of AI-generated content and the measured approach of ethical journalism. News organizations facing pressure to publish swiftly areparticularly prone to this disparity, making it essential that rigorous editorial standards, rather than advanced technological capabilities, serve as the key protection.No matter how advanced a detection tool may be, it cannot take the place of an organizational culture which places a priority on accuracy rather than on immediacy. The responsibility for digital trust does not fall solely on journalists. Public media literacy the ability to critically assess a viral image, to look for a second source before sharing, and to identify the emotional manipulation often present in synthetic content serves as a crucial second line of defense. In this regard, ethical journalism and an informed audience are interdependent: one cannot completely substitute for the lack of the other. The diligence of a newsroom holds little value if its audience hasn’t been prepared to recognize and demand that diligence in the first place. So, in an age when artificial intelligence is involved, ethical journalism does not call for rejecting technology; rather it involves basing the use of technology on firm principles of verification, transparency, and accountability. The future of the newsroom won’t be determined by how fast it publishes, but by the care with which it confirms the facts, and perhaps that is the most human safeguard we still have. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Mission to Pakistan or USEFP/PUAN.

By Dr Sajid Shiek Pakistan’s social protection programmes have helped many vulnerable families. The Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) and its health and nutrition-linked initiatives are meant to support mothers, children, and low-income households. BISP’s Nashonuma programme is described by the programme itself as a conditional cash transfer initiative for health and nutrition, and it works through facilitation centres at government health facilities. In Sindh, the Mother and Child Support Program, also known as MAMTA, is similarly designed to provide cash support to pregnant and lactating women while linking assistance with regular health checkups. These efforts are important and deserve recognition. At the same time, public programmes should also be reviewed for how they affect service delivery inside already crowded health facilities. Having worked as a Medical Officer in the Health Department since 2014, I have seen that the implementation of these programmes in government hospitals can create practical difficulties, especially in rural areas. This is not a criticism of the welfare idea itself. It is a concern about how the system is being managed. Many rural government hospitals in Sindh already face limited space, staff shortages, and pressure on basic resources. When programme-related procedures are carried out in the same facilities, the number of visitors increases further. In some centres, outpatient attendance has risen sharply, not only because of illness, but also because beneficiaries must visit hospitals to complete formalities linked to these programmes. As a result, outpatient departments become crowded for much of the day. Doctors and paramedical staff must divide their time between patient care and administrative work. Medicines, supplies, and other hospital resources are used more quickly, which can affect patients who come for treatment of genuine medical problems. Crowding also makes infection prevention more difficult. The World Health Organization says infection prevention and control is essential for safe and quality healthcare, and that without effective IPC, quality health care delivery is not possible. In busy facilities, long queues and congested waiting areas can increase the risk of spreading communicable diseases, especially among pregnant women, infants, and older patients. Another issue that deserves attention is the possible effect on family planning services. Financial support linked to pregnancy and safe delivery can encourage maternal care, but policymakers should also consider whether such incentives are fully aligned with broader reproductive health and population management goals. This is an area that needs careful assessment rather than assumptions. The burden is not only physical. Healthcare workers are also under pressure. The WHO has noted that high levels of stress, burnout, and workforce strain are linked to staff shortages, unsafe working conditions, and stressful environments, and that at least a quarter of health and care workers reported anxiety, depression, and burnout symptoms between January 2020 and April 2022. In crowded facilities, these pressures can grow further and affect the quality of care. The solution does not require reducing social welfare programmes. It requires better coordination. A practical step would be to establish separate BISP and MAMTA facilitation centres outside hospitals, or at least in dedicated administrative units with separate staff. This would allow beneficiaries to receive support without interrupting clinical work. Hospitals could then focus on diagnosis, treatment, emergency care, maternal services, immunization, and disease prevention. Better coordination between social protection and health departments would reduce congestion, improve infection control, and allow medical staff to spend more time on patient care. It would also make the welfare system more efficient and easier for beneficiaries to use. Pakistan does not need to choose between social protection and healthcare. Both are public responsibilities, and both should strengthen each other. If welfare administration is kept separate from clinical services, hospitals can remain focused on healing, while social programmes continue to support the poor in a more effective way. This issue deserves review at the policy level. A small structural change could improve both healthcare delivery and social protection outcomes across the country. The writer is a senior Medical Officer. He can be reached at doctorsajid07@gmail.com

I have been suffering from this mental illness for so many years, and I don’t know what to do. Sixty-five percent of my life has been spent suffering from obsessive compulsive disorder and schizophrenia. My mother is Mahrukh Butt, and she is with me here in Lahore. I don’t know when these sufferings will end. It has crossed the limits, you know. I am in Lahore, Pakistan right now. The day before yesterday I was so unwell. I was in Lahore at my home, and I heard voices for more than five hours, and I was getting a severe headache, and I was going through hell, and I still am. I don’t know what to do. The sufferings have no intention of stopping. We are born into this world with no fault of our own, and there is only misery in this life. I hear voices almost every day for hours, and as you know, I have been having compulsions for more than fifteen years now, and that is not a joke. They tell me that if I don’t do the compulsions, then something bad will happen to me. I want to go to Karachi with my friend Alina Mehmood, who is six years older than me and used to come to our house in Islamabad when my father was alive, when we used to have parties at our house in Khudadad Heights. The party used to start at ten at night and go on till four in the morning, and the music was playing, and everything was rocking. I will go to Karachi by plane, and that will cost over forty thousand rupees, and I will go to Dolmen Mall and also to Liberty Books, though it is very expensive. The music in the background reminds me of London and Bangkok. My relative Hassan Raza Sherazi has gone to England, and I will go straight to Islamabad when he comes back, as a matter of fact. The thing I love to do is travel by plane. I love going to Thailand, and also writing books and articles. We went to New York City twice, to my father’s friend’s house in the suburb of Millburn. I love to write articles for Pakistani newspapers, although I get no money for doing so, as a matter of fact. A few months ago, I was in my bedroom here in Lahore, and I was waiting for the aliens to come and abduct me, but no one came. They had to take me to their planet or to the moon, although the American government is actually covering up aliens and these sorts of conspiracy theories, and they do not want the public to know the reality and the truth behind aliens. But I know that they exist. I am in Lahore, Pakistan right now. I spent twenty-five days in Islamabad, Pakistan, and now I have shifted into my house in Cantt. I really want to go to Karachi, Pakistan, as I need a break.