Two commentaries respond to a case about apnea testing to confirm death by neurologic criteria.

For many physicians, lack of understanding about brain death leads to confusion and muddles interactions with patients’ loved ones at the end of life.

The DDR requires organ donors to be dead according to legal criteria prior to organ removal, and it’s rooted in fears of civil and criminal liability.

Criteria in statutes and tests used to diagnose brain death don’t always jibe, and this can undermine public trust in death pronouncements.

Public awareness of brain death is based largely on inaccurate media representations. It’s no wonder so few of us understand brain death.

Death’s legal definition must be responsive to advances in technology, and it must delineate between life and death. Knowing where to draw the line is difficult.

The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.

Dr Ariane Lewis discusses how we can navigate uncertainty and ambiguity about brain death by understanding clinical criteria for brain death determination and how our approaches to death are culturally and socially situated.

Long-acting injectables powerfully augment HIV care, but broad acceptance and uptake could be compromised by what we know about experiences with antipsychotics.

Ending AIDS requires normalizing justice-based approaches to HIV care and acknowledging how power dynamics shape popular narratives and practices.