Cyber threats like hacking, phishing, ransomware, and distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks have the potential to cause enormous problems for organizations. Not only can companies suffer serious service disruption and reputational damage, but the loss of personal data can also result in huge fines from regulators.
Take British Airways as an example. In 2019, the airline was fined more than £183m by the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) after customer data was compromised in a cyber-attack. Customer details, including name, address, logins, and payment card, were harvested by hackers – affecting half a million customers in total. The fine, which amounts to around 1.5% of British Airways’ global 2018 turnover, was the first proposed by the ICO under the new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Cyberattacks like this are hitting the headlines with increasing frequency. But
As COVID-19 cases surged this spring, the pandemic led some people more than others to ponder their own mortality. A new study in China and the United States suggests that these people were the ones who showed the highest levels of stress and the least engagement at work.
But the research also uncovered a bright spot: The right kind of boss helped reduce stress and increase engagement and pro-social behavior in their workers who were anxious about COVID-19.
“A global pandemic can lead some people to think about their own mortality, which will understandably make them more stressed and less engaged at work,” said Jia (Jasmine) Hu, lead author of the study and associate professor of management and human resources at The Ohio State University’s Fisher College of Business.
“But business leaders who are attentive to employees’ emotional needs and unite them behind a common purpose made a positive difference
Certain procedural heart attacks were more clinically significant than others after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, reports suggested.
Just how clinically relevant procedural myocardial infarctions (MIs) are after PCI has long been a point of controversy, especially when comparing the procedure to CABG, where some degree of myocardial injury is inherently expected.
Just how sensitive the results of the EXCEL and SYNTAX trials were to how peri-procedural MI had been defined was detailed in two post hoc analyses published in the Oct. 6 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
EXCEL vs Third Universal Definition
EXCEL investigators defended their pre-specified protocol definition of peri-procedural MI and the conclusions they drew from the trial despite conflicting findings when such heart attacks were counted according to the Third Universal Definition.
The incidence of procedural MI reached 3.6% of the PCI group and