Research

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      China to Launch Tianwen-2 Mission to Capture Pieces of Near-Earth Asteroid

      by

      The robotic Tianwen-2 spacecraft will collect samples from Kamoʻoalewa, which some scientists suspect is a fragment of the moon.China has a space station and, in just a few short years, has landed robots on the moon and Mars. This week the country’s space agency is targeting new, far-flung destinations and setting off for an asteroid that could contain secrets that explain how Earth and the moon formed.The country’s Tianwen-2 spacecraft is set to lift off aboard a Long March 3B rocket from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center in southwest China some time on Thursday (it will be Wednesday in New York).After about a year, the robotic mission will arrive at 469219 Kamoʻoalewa, a near-Earth asteroid. There, it will perilously try to scoop up some rocky matter, and then swing back around to Earth. A capsule filled with geologic treasure would then plunge toward the planet for retrieval by scientists in late 2027.If Tianwen-2 pulls this off, China will become the third nation — after Japan and the United States — to retrieve pristine material from an asteroid.“All Chinese planetary scientists are now finger-crossed for this historic mission,” said Yuqi Qian, a lunar geologist at the University of Hong Kong.The spacecraft also has a secondary target, an unusual comet that it could study as part of an extended mission.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Wants $3 Billion in Harvard Grants Redirected to Trade Schools

      by

      In a social media post, the president mused about redirecting $3 billion in research grant funding that his administration has frozen or withdrawn, but he gave no details.President Trump floated a new plan on Monday for the $3 billion he wants to strip from Harvard University, saying in a social media post that he was thinking about using the money to fund vocational schools.“I am considering taking THREE BILLION DOLLARS of Grant Money away from a very antisemitic Harvard, and giving it to TRADE SCHOOLS all across our land,” Mr. Trump posted on Truth Social, his social media platform.The announcement, among the president’s Memorial Day social media messages, did not appear to refer to any new cut in funding, but rather to a redistribution of money the administration already announced it had frozen or stripped from Harvard and its research partners.Mr. Trump gave no details about how such a plan would work.The message was accompanied by yet another post accusing Harvard of being slow to respond to the administration’s requests for information on “foreign student lists.” Mr. Trump said his administration wanted them in order to determine how many “radicalized lunatics, troublemakers all, should not be let back into our Country.”The posts seemed intended to keep up public relations pressure on Harvard, the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university. Harvard is engaged in an epic battle with the White House, rooted in the administration’s claims that the university tolerates antisemitism and promotes liberal ideology.Harvard declined on Monday to comment on the president’s post.The university is battling the White House in federal court in Boston to secure the reinstatement of grants and contracts that the government has frozen or withdrawn, amounting to more than $3 billion. In a separate lawsuit, the university is also fighting Mr. Trump’s plan to take away the university’s right to admit international students.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Blood Test for Alzheimer’s: What to Know

      by

      The test may make it easier to identify whether people with memory and thinking problems have Alzheimer’s or not.A blood test that can help diagnose Alzheimer’s disease has received clearance from the Food and Drug Administration. This is a step toward a goal of scientists and doctors to one day be able to diagnose a confounding illness with the prick of a finger. But there is still a long way to go.Here is what to know:What is the test, and how should it be used?The test, manufactured by Fujirebio Diagnostics, is intended to be used only by specialists in Alzheimer’s, the F.D.A. said. Its mouthful of a name — Lumipulse G pTau217/ß-Amyloid 1-42 Plasma Ratio — describes what the test measures: levels of two proteins, amyloid and tau, that are hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease.In people who develop Alzheimer’s, amyloid begins to accumulate and form plaques in the brain more than 20 years before any symptoms of cognitive impairment. Tau accumulates later, forming tangles in the brain, and is much more closely correlated with cognitive decline.Can people who don’t have memory problems take the blood test?No. The F.D.A., and Alzheimer’s experts, emphasized that the blood test should be given only to people who are already experiencing cognitive decline and are ages 55 and older. Moreover, it should not be used on its own to diagnose or to rule out Alzheimer’s.“Other clinical evaluations or additional tests should be used for determining treatment options,” the F.D.A. said in a statement, adding that “the results must be interpreted in conjunction with other patient clinical information.”The current gold standard for diagnosing Alzheimer’s still involves either imaging using PET scans, which are expensive, or spinal taps, which are invasive. The blood test can help flag the presence of the Alzheimer’s-related proteins, and doctors might then order confirmatory testing with one of the other methods.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump’s Push to Defund Harvard Prompts Clash Over Veteran Suicide Research

      by

      The proposed termination of medical research funded by the V.A. is part of the Trump administration’s broader pressure campaign against the university.The Trump administration’s move to cancel a slew of federal contracts at Harvard University has sparked an internal clash over the impact on medical research intended to help veterans, including projects involving suicide prevention, toxic particle exposure and prostate cancer screening, according to emails reviewed by The New York Times.The dispute among officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs has focused in part on a collaboration with Harvard Medical School to develop a predictive model to help V.A. emergency room physicians decide whether suicidal veterans should be hospitalized, according to the records.Canceling that contract would result in “more veteran suicides that could have been prevented,” Seth J. Custer, an official in the V.A.’s Office of Research and Development, wrote in a May 8 email asking leaders at the agency to reverse their decision. But John Figueroa, a longtime private industry health care executive and a senior adviser to Doug Collins, the veterans affairs secretary, said that researchers at other institutions could do the work instead.Peter Kasperowicz, a V.A. spokesman, said that the department’s research contracts with Harvard were “under review.” He said the goal of the review was to ensure that “the projects best support the Trump administration’s veterans-first agenda.”Mr. Custer declined to comment. In a brief telephone interview, Mr. Figueroa said the V.A. was examining “every contract” it had issued. A White House spokeswoman declined to comment. So did a spokeswoman for Harvard.The tensions inside the V.A. over the Harvard contracts demonstrate how President Trump’s use of research funds as leverage in his broader pressure campaign on universities carries political risks. Mr. Trump and other Republicans have courted veterans as a key political constituency, and Mr. Collins has repeatedly promised that veteran care would not be affected, even as he enacts major cost-cutting measures and other changes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Why Patients Are Being Forced to Switch to a 2nd-Choice Obesity Drug

      by

      CVS Caremark decided to stop offering Zepbound in favor of Wegovy for weight loss. It’s the latest example of limits imposed by insurance that disrupt treatments for patients.Tens of thousands of Americans will soon be forced by their health insurance to switch from one popular obesity drug to another that produces less weight loss.It is the latest example of the consequences of secret deals between drugmakers and middlemen, known as pharmacy benefit managers, that are hired by employers to oversee prescription coverage for Americans. Employers pay lower drug prices but their workers are blocked from getting competing treatments, a type of insurance denial that has grown much more common in the past decade.One of the largest benefit managers, CVS Health’s Caremark, made the decision to exclude Zepbound in spite of research that found that it resulted in more weight loss than Wegovy, which will continue to be covered.Those research findings, first announced in December, were confirmed in an article published on Sunday in The New England Journal of Medicine. The study involved a large clinical trial comparing the drugs that was funded by Eli Lilly, the maker of Zepbound. Earlier research not financed by Eli Lilly reached similar conclusions.Ellen Davis, 63, of Huntington, Mass., is one of the patients affected by Caremark’s decision. “It feels like the rug is getting pulled out from under my feet,” she said.After taking Zepbound for a year, she has lost 85 pounds and her health has improved, she said. She retired after working for 34 years at Verizon, which hired Caremark for her drug coverage.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Federal Report Denounces Gender Treatments for Adolescents

      by

      The H.H.S. review may set the stage for additional restrictions on gender-affirming care. Critics described it as an ideological statement.Federal health officials published a report on Thursday declaring that the use of hormonal and surgical treatments in young people with gender dysphoria lacked scientific evidence and expressing concern about long-term harms, a stark reversal from previous agency recommendations and the advice of top U.S. medical groups.The report instead prioritized the role of psychotherapy, a divisive intervention to treat gender dysphoria that many advocates and physicians have equated with so-called conversion therapy.Other parts of the review seemed to call into question the very notion that some people have a gender identity that does not align with their sex at birth.In January, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Protecting Children From Chemical and Surgical Mutilation” giving the Department of Health and Human Services 90 days to produce a report on the best practices for treating young people who say their gender does not align with their birth sex.But the order made it clear that the administration had already reached its own conclusion about gender transition treatments for minors, characterizing the “blatant harm done to children” as a “stain on our nation’s history.”The 400-page report took a more sober tone but reached a similar conclusion. In a remarkable departure from the standard for medical evidence reviews, the authors were not identified pending a post-publication review process that would begin in “the coming days.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      See Where Federal Dollars Flow to Universities Around the Country

      by

      <!–> [–><!–> –> <!–>Each circle is a university: PublicPrivate–> <!–> –><!–> [–><!–>In fiscal year 2023 alone, roughly $60 billion flowed from the federal government to universities in all 50 states, funding research on an array of topics, like cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and rare isotope beams. Funding went to small colleges, like the College of St. […] More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Citing N.I.H. Cuts, a Top Science Journal Stops Accepting Submissions

      by

      With federal support, Environmental Health Perspectives has long published peer-reviewed studies without fees to readers or scientists.Environmental Health Perspectives, widely considered the premier environmental health journal, has announced that it would pause acceptance of new studies for publication, as federal cuts have left its future uncertain.For more than 50 years, the journal has received funding from the National Institutes of Health to review studies on the health effects of environmental toxins — from “forever chemicals” to air pollution — and publish the research free of charge.The editors made the decision to halt acceptance of studies because of a “lack of confidence” that contracts for critical expenses like copy-editing and editorial software would be renewed after their impending expiration dates, said Joel Kaufman, the journal’s top editor.He declined to comment on the publication’s future prospects. “If the journal is indeed lost, it is a huge loss,” said Jonathan Levy, chair of the department of environmental health at Boston University. “It’s reducing the ability for people to have good information that can be used to make good decisions.”The news comes weeks after a federal prosecutor in Washington sent letters to several scientific journals, including The New England Journal of Medicine, with questions that suggested that they were biased against certain views and influenced by external pressures.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More