Science

Subterms

    Latest story

    188 Shares92 Views

    Proposed UK cuts to global aid fund could lead to 300,000 preventable deaths, say charities

    by

    The UK is expected to slash its contribution to a leading aid fund combating preventable diseases, with charities warning this could lead to more than 300,000 otherwise preventable deaths.If confirmed, the anticipated 20% cut in the UK contribution to the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, would be announced on the sidelines of next month’s G20 summit in South Africa, which Keir Starmer is due to attend.Aid groups said such a reduction, on top of a 30% cut to the UK contribution at the previous funding round for the group three years ago, would further risk years of progress in combating the disease after Donald Trump slashed US aid.No decision has been publicly announced before the Global Fund’s “replenishment” summit, covering 2027-29, and one government official said this did not recognise the extent of the cut predicted.However, aid groups say a proposed reduction in UK funding from £1bn to £800m is being widely discussed by senior government officials.If confirmed, it would follow a 25% reduction in UK money towards another aid organisation seen as being highly efficient in saving lives, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (Gavi). The eventual £1.25bn commitment over five years to Gavi was nonetheless higher than many aid agencies had feared.The Switzerland-based Global Fund is credited with helping to save tens of million of lives in combating the three diseases. One aid agency estimated a £200m cut could lead to up to 340,000 avoidable deaths and nearly 5.9 million avoidable infections over the three-year funding period.Gareth Jenkins, an executive director at Malaria No More UK, said: “The world stands on the brink of a malaria resurgence, which will be so much more likely triggered if the UK makes a cut to its contribution to the Global Fund.“In this scenario many more children will lose their lives, health systems will be overwhelmed and economies dragged down – with huge knock-on effects for UK trade and health security.”Mike Podmore, the chief executive of StopAids, said the cut “would send a terrible message”, particularly as the UK is officially co-hosting next month’s funding event.Podmore said: “Not only did the UK already make a 30% cut three years ago, but to date no host has ever reduced their commitment from their previous pledge. This would represent a serious lack of leadership and undermine the UK’s reputation and soft power.”Adrian Lovett, the UK head of the development campaign One, said the cut would “put at risk decades of progress in the fight against Aids, TB and malaria – and as diseases do not stop at borders, it would jeopardise our own health security here at home too”.Monica Harding, the Liberal Democrats’ international development spokesperson, said cutting funding as co-host would be “an indictment of our global leadership in diplomacy and development”.She said: “Stepping back now and reducing our contribution to the fund at a time when the United States is abandoning vaccination programmes wholesale would be devastating to some of the world’s most vulnerable people. It would risk undoing much of the progress we have made in the global fight against disease.”A Foreign Office spokesperson said: “The UK has not yet decided what its pledge to the Global Fund will be. We will announce this in due course.” More

    More stories

    • 175 Shares140 Views

      in US Politics

      Jane Goodall said she would launch Trump and Musk on one-way trip into space

      by

      In a lifetime studying the behavior of chimpanzees, Jane Goodall became something of an authority on the aggressiveness of alpha male adults. Now, in an interview released just days after her death, the famed primatologist reveals what she would do with Donald Trump, Elon Musk and other human beings she saw as showing similar traits: launch them on a one-way trip into space.The insight into Goodall’s thinking comes in the Netflix documentary Famous Last Words, recorded in March and kept under wraps until her death last week at the age of 91.“There are people I don’t like, and I would like to put them on one of Musk’s spaceships and send them all off to the planet he’s sure he’s going to discover,” Goodall tells interviewer Brad Falchuk during the revelatory 55-minute special discussing her life, work and legacy.Would Musk, the SpaceX founder and Trump ally with a penchant for apparent Nazi-style salutes and firing thousands of federal workers, be among them, Falchuk wanted to know.“Oh, absolutely. He’d be the host. You can imagine who I’d put on that spaceship. Along with Musk would be Trump and some of Trump’s real supporters,” she said.“And then I would put [Russian president Vladimir] Putin in there, and I would put [China’s] President Xi. I’d certainly put [Israeli prime minister Benjamin] Netanyahu in there and his far-right government. Put them all on that spaceship and send them off.”It is not the first time that Goodall, a champion of environmental advocacy, has been critical of Trump in particular.In a 2022 interview with MSNBC she said he exhibited “the same sort of behavior as a male chimpanzee will show when he’s competing for dominance with another. They’re upright, they swagger, they project themselves as really more large and aggressive than they may actually be in order to intimidate their rivals.”In the Netflix interview, the first in the streaming network’s new series capturing the thoughts of iconic world figures to be broadcast only after their death, Goodall further explained her thinking.“We get, interestingly, two types of alpha. One does it all by aggression, and because they’re strong and they fight, they don’t last very long. Others do it by using their brains, like a young male will only challenge a higher-ranking one if his friend, often his brother, is with him. And you know, they last much, much longer,” she said.She also examined the “politicization” of behavior, and what her studies had taught her about aggressive behaviors shown by groups of humans and chimpanzees when confronted with something they perceived as hostile, even if no threat existed.“Chimps see a stranger from a neighboring community, and they get all excited, and the hair stands out, and they reach out and touch another, and they’ve got these faces of anger and fear, and it catches, and the others catch that feeling that this one male has had, and they all become aggressive,” she said.“It’s contagious,” she added. “Some of these demonstrations that turn aggressive, it sweeps through them. They all want to become and join in and become aggressive. They’re protecting their territory or fighting for dominance.”Falchuk asked if she believed it was the same for humans. “Probably, sometimes yes. But I truly believe that most people are decent,” she said.“My biggest hope is raising this new generation of compassionate citizens, roots and shoots. But do we have time? I don’t know. It’s a really grim time.”Goodall, born in London five years before the start of the second world war, likened the fight against the darkness of present-day politics to Britain standing up to Nazi Germany, and the “spirit of obstinance” shown by Winston Churchill.“That doesn’t mean you don’t have moments of depression, but then you come out of it and say, ‘OK, I’m not going to let them win,’” she said.“It’s like Churchill in the war, his famous speech, we’ll fight them on the beaches, we’ll fight them in the streets and the cities, then he turned aside to a friend and was heard to say, ‘and we’ll fight them at the ends of broken bottles because that’s all we’ve bloody well got’.”Goodall, in a post-interview address to camera, ended with a message of encouragement for those fighting against political oppression and the climate emergency.“Even today, when the planet is dark, there still is hope. Don’t lose hope. If you lose hope, you become apathetic and do nothing,” she said.“And if you want to save what is still beautiful in this world – if you want to save the planet for the future generations, your grandchildren, their grandchildren – then think about the actions you take each day. Because, multiplied a million, a billion times, even small actions will make for great change.” More

    • 125 Shares138 Views

      in US Politics

      Why is the Trump administration obsessed with autism? – podcast

      by

      Archive: Good Morning America, NPR, NBC News, WHAS11, BBC News, CBS News, Jimmy Kimmel Live, LiveNowFox
      Listen to Science Weekly’s episode factchecking Trump’s claims about paracetamol
      Buy Carter Sherman’s book, The Second Coming: Sex and the Next Generation’s Fight Over its Future, here
      Buy Jonathan Freedland’s new book, The Traitor’s Circle, here
      Buy John Harris’ book, Maybe I’m Amazed, about connecting with his son James, diagnosed with autism as a child, through music
      Send your questions and feedback to politicsweeklyamerica@theguardian.com
      Support the Guardian. Go to theguardian.com/politicspodus More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Daylight savings haters rejoice: scientists confirm it’s bad for health

      by

      Daylight savings time is not just a hassle – it can also be bad for your health.The twice-yearly “spring forward, fall back” routine rattles our bodies’ daily cycles, known as circadian rhythms, with potentially harmful consequences. And a new study supports what many sleep experts have long argued: the solution is getting rid of daylight savings for good.That will not be easy. While there is plenty of support for eliminating the time change itself, Donald Trump and some in Congress have called for the opposite: making daylight savings permanent. And it may prove unpopular with those of us who enjoy an extra hour of light on a summer’s evening.Researchers at Stanford University found that keeping our clocks on standard time year round, instead of just in the autumn and winter (as in most US states as well as the UK), would reduce the prevalence of obesity and strokes. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, stands apart from much other research thanks to its breadth. Instead of simply looking at what happens when the clocks change, the researchers compared three scenarios: permanent standard time, permanent daylight savings time, and the current switching system, which applies in most US states.Dr Jamie Zeitzer, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences, and Lara Weed, a PhD candidate in bioengineering, modeled sunlight exposure across every county in the 48 contiguous states, and compared that information with federal health data. The goal, Zeitzer says, was to use an existing mathematical model to discover the “circadian burden” of the three daylight scenarios – in other words, “how much stress are we putting on the circadian system?” That stress is associated with a variety of disorders, including obesity and stroke. The result suggested that, at least in circadian terms, permanent standard time is the least burdensome on our health.“This goes along with what we’ve been saying since about 2019,” says Dr Karin Johnson, a neurology professor at the University of Massachusetts Chan school of medicine and a member of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine’s advocacy committee. Johnson testified in favor of permanent standard time in front of a US Senate committee in April, telling lawmakers it would create “a more natural alignment between our social schedules and the sun’s cycle every day of the year”.“Our body rhythms basically get set by the sun,” she says. But because our natural cycle is slightly longer than 24 hours, “we need to get cues every day to stay on track. Otherwise, our rhythms get delayed.” That results in problems ranging from trouble sleeping and waking up to digestive issues. “The more we can stay aligned with the sun time,” she says, “the healthier it is for our body, the better our brain functions, the better our sleep.” The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM), American Academy of Neurology and the health and safety-focused non-profit National Safety Council agree.But that argument runs counter to a repeated effort in Congress to pass the Sunshine Protection Act, which would change the system to make daylight savings permanent. Unlike virtually everything else Congress grapples with, it does not seem to be a highly partisan matter; Ted Cruz, for instance, has heard “serious arguments on both sides” and even Trump has acknowledged it’s a “50-50 issue”.Permanent daylight savings may sound appealing, since skipping an hour in the spring results in long, sunlit evenings, but Johnson says that view is misleading. “It’s really summer people are loving but they connect it in their mind to daylight savings time,” she says. Even under standard time, she notes, summer nights would be long. Permanent daylight savings, on the other hand, would cost us essential light during winter mornings – though of course, late-rising Americans may prefer to have that light in the evening.A Gallup poll this year found declining support for daylight savings time overall, with 48% of Americans supporting permanent standard time, 24% backing permanent daylight savings, and 19% wanting to stick with the current system. In 2023, however, a YouGov poll found that among those who wanted to stop switching the clocks, 50% supported permanent daylight savings and 31% supported permanent standard time.As for Zeitzer, while his latest research argues in favor of permanent standard time, he cautions that circadian rhythms are just a “piece of the puzzle”. “Do people exercise more if there’s more light in the morning? Are fewer kids biking to school because it’s too dark in the morning? Are there better economic outputs that are going to help economically marginalized individuals?” he asks. “There are lots of things that could happen if you move where that hour of light is happening, and frankly, it might be very different in different parts of the country.”Advocates of permanent daylight savings have suggested it could, for instance, help fight seasonal depression, save energy and reduce vehicle crashes. (And while the AASM ranks permanent daylight savings as the worst of the three options, Zeitzer’s study asserts it’s better than the constant switching.)But to Johnson, the answer is clear. “It’s a long, slow process but I think getting the word out with studies like this can hopefully shift that needle” toward permanent standard time, she says. “Because people are desperate to end the time change.” More

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Six great reads: rebels in Nazi Germany, how creativity works and Europe’s biggest pornography conference

      by

      1. The astonishing story of the aristocrat who hid her Jewish lover in a sofa bed – and other German rebels who defied the NazisView image in fullscreenFrom a diplomat who embraced the exiled Albert Einstein to a schoolteacher who helped “non-Aryan” students flee, these remarkable individuals refused to bend the knee to Hitler – only to be dramatically betrayed. What, asked Jonathan Freedland, in this extract from his new book, The Traitors Circle, made them risk it all?Read more2. The unconscious process that leads to creativity: how ‘incubation’ worksView image in fullscreen“One of the most marvellous properties of the brain,” wrote Dutch psychologist Ap Dijksterhuis in this fascinating piece from Well Actually, is its ability to continue working unconsciously when the conscious mind has moved on to something else.Read more3. Disgruntled NYT journalist to ‘anti-woke’ power grab: how far can Bari Weiss go?View image in fullscreenAfter leaving the New York Times, Weiss turned her Substack into an unshakable pro-Israel voice. Now as Paramount eyes acquisition of her company, David Klion profiled a writer who is poised to become Trump’s ally among media elites.Read more4. Israel is forcing us to leave Gaza City. We know they may never let us returnView image in fullscreenIn this deeply personal piece, Gaza reporter Malak A Tantesh wrote about her family’s decision to leave northern Gaza, the area they call home, for the tents of the south where they had also endured last year’s winter. The family has stayed in 10 locations since they were first forced out of their prewar home in Beit Lahia.Read more5. Boom times and total burnout: three days at Europe’s biggest pornography conferenceView image in fullscreenIn this powerful feature, Amelia Gentleman, alongside photographer Judith Jockel, reported from the biggest pornography conference in Europe, where she spoke to entrepreneurs who were excited about AI and soaring profits, and creators who were battling burnout and chronic illness due to the industry’s gig-economy structure.Read more6. ‘I wasn’t terrified of dying, but I didn’t want to leave my kids’: Davina McCall on addiction, reality TV and the brain tumour that nearly killed herView image in fullscreenWhen the TV presenter was offered a free health screening, she thought it was pointless: she was “the healthiest woman you’ve ever met”. But then came the shocking diagnosis. Now fully recovered, she told Simon Hattenstone, she’s re‑evaluating everything.Read more More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr does not just reject vaccines. He rejects science and must step down | Bernie Sanders

      by

      Since taking office, Robert F Kennedy Jr, the secretary of the health and human services department (HHS), has undermined vaccines at every turn. He has dismissed the entire Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine advisory panel, narrowed access to life-saving Covid-19 vaccines, filled scientific advisory boards with conspiracy theorists and fired the newly appointed CDC director for refusing to rubber-stamp his actions.But his rejection of vaccines is only part of the problem. Secretary Kennedy is unfit to be our nation’s leading public health official because he rejects the fundamental principles of modern science.For generations, doctors have agreed that germs – like bacteria or viruses – cause infectious diseases.In the 1850s, John Snow, known as the father of epidemiology, traced a cholera outbreak in London to water contaminated with human waste – not the “bad air”, or so-called miasma, that many at that time believed to be the cause.In the 1880s, Louis Pasteur, the French chemist, in a controlled experiment, injected one group of sheep with an anthrax vaccine while another group went without it. Then he injected all of the sheep with anthrax bacteria. The vaccinated sheep survived, the unvaccinated did not.The germ theory led to a revolution in public health and medicine which, over the years, has saved tens of millions of lives.Just a few examples.At a time when many women were dying during childbirth at hospitals, Dr Ignaz Semmelweis found that handwashing by doctors saved lives.Joseph Lister showed that sterilizing medical equipment before surgery prevented needless deaths.Florence Nightingale, considered the mother of modern nursing, substantially improved hygiene at hospitals and made healthcare much safer for patients.Pasteur made the food we eat and the milk we drink safer through a process of heating called pasteurization.And these are just a few examples.Yet, incredibly, in the year 2025, we now have a secretary of HHS who has cast doubt and aspersions on the very concept of the germ theory – the very foundation of modern medicine for over a century.In his book The Real Anthony Fauci, Kennedy absurdly claims that the central tenet behind the germ theory “is simply untrue”. Vaccines are not, Kennedy falsely asserts, responsible for the massive decline in deaths from infectious diseases. Instead, Kennedy falsely proclaims that “science actually gives the honor of having vanquished disease mortalities to sanitation and nutrition”.Yes. No one disputes that proper sanitation, a nutritious diet and exercise can lead to healthier lives. But no credible scientist or doctor believes that alone makes a person immune from polio, measles, mumps, Covid, HIV/Aids and other infectious diseases. Otherwise healthy people can become sick, hospitalized or even die from these and other terrible diseases.Sadly, Kennedy’s dangerous rejection of well-established science is behind his wild conspiracy theories and misinformation campaigns.It’s what led to Kennedy’s false assertion that “there is no vaccine that is safe and effective” despite peer-reviewed scientific studies finding that vaccines have saved more than 150 million lives and reduced infant deaths by 40% in the past 50 years.It’s behind Kennedy’s bogus claim that the polio vaccine “killed many, many, many, many, many more people than polio ever did”, even though the scientific data has shown that the polio vaccine has saved 1.5 million lives and prevented about 20 million people from becoming paralyzed since 1988.It undergirds his history of promoting the ridiculous idea that HIV does not cause Aids, despite rigorous studies finding the exact opposite. This type of outrageous HIV/Aids denialism is widely believed to have caused the deaths of at least 330,000 people in South Africa who did not receive the life-saving medicine they needed.It’s what led him to say that the Covid vaccine was the “deadliest vaccine ever made”, that vaccines cause autism, and that the hepatitis B vaccine doesn’t work and should only be used for “prostitutes” and “promiscuous gay men” – lies that have been thoroughly debunked by scientific data and the medical community.Frighteningly, it’s what caused Kennedy to say: “I see somebody on a hiking trail carrying a little baby and I say to him, ‘Better not get him vaccinated.’ And he heard that from me. If he hears it from 10 other people, maybe he won’t do it.”As a private citizen, Kennedy is entitled to his views, no matter how misguided they may be.If Kennedy would like to swim in water contaminated by raw sewage and fecal matter, as he has done recently in Washington DC’s Rock Creek Park, he is free to do that.But as our nation’s top health official, Secretary Kennedy’s rejection of science and the actions he has taken as a result of his bizarre ideology is endangering the lives of millions of children in the United States and throughout the world.Today, Kennedy is making it harder for people to get vaccines. Tomorrow, what will it be? Will he tell doctors they don’t need to wash their hands before surgery? Will he tell hospitals that they don’t need to sterilize their scalpels and other medical equipment?The American people need a secretary of HHS who will listen to scientists and doctors, and not conspiracy theorists.We need a secretary of HHS who will listen to medical experts who may disagree with him, not fire them summarily.Bottom line: we need an HHS secretary who will not engage in a war on science and the truth itself.Secretary Kennedy must step down.

      Bernie Sanders is a US senator, and ranking member of the health, education, labor and pensions committee. He represents the state of Vermont and is the longest-serving independent in the history of Congress More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Can you solve it? Are you a genius at gerrymandering?

      by

      Gerrymandering is the practice of redrawing the boundaries of political districts to favour certain parties or politicians.On Friday, Texas governor Greg Abbott signed a new redistricting bill with a gerrymandered map that will heavily favour Republicans – and California governor Gavin Newsom plans to retaliate by doing the same in his state for Democrats.Irresepective of the politics of gerrymandering, however, the ruse conceals some interesting maths. Such as – given a certain distribution of voters, how do you draw a map that makes the minority party win the majority of districts?It’s exactly this question that underlies today’s puzzles.In each of the grids below, the challenge is to find the unique electoral map in which the minority colour wins the most regions. A region is defined as a contiguous block of cells that are joined either horizontally or vertically. (A region cannot contain any cells that are only connected diagonally, i.e. via a corner.) Winning a region means having the most cells in that region.The puzzles were conceived by Brady Forrest, a university student in Toronto, whose online alias is Deckard.ExampleDivide the grid into 3 regions of 3 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of the regions.To solve using pencil and paper, click here for a print out (and some bonus puzzles). To play on your screen, below each puzzle is a link to an interactive version.Puzzle 1: EasyDivide the grid into 5 regions of 5 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions.View image in fullscreenPuzzle 2: MediumDivide the grid into 5 regions of 10 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions. No ties allowed in any region.View image in fullscreenPuzzle 3: HardDivide the grid into 7 regions of 7 cells each. Blue, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions. No ties allowed for first place in any region.View image in fullscreenI’ll be back at 5pm UK with the solutions.NO SPOILERS Please discuss the maths of gerrymandering.Thanks to Deckard for sharing his puzzles. Thanks to Starwort for the interactive versions.I’ve been setting a puzzle here on alternate Mondays since 2015. I’m always on the look-out for great puzzles. If you would like to suggest one, email me.View image in fullscreenIn other Gerry-related news, here’s a fact from my new book, Football School Facts. Gerry Taggart (ex-Bolton) is one of only four Premier League players to have been sent off on their birthdays. The wrong sort of card! This curio and hundreds of others appear in the book, the latest in the long-running series I write with Ben Lyttleton for children aged 7 to 107. Football School Facts is full-colour, hardback, would make an excellent gift, and is available at the Guardian Bookshop. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      CDC in crisis: who are the top officials resigning or being forced out?

      by

      A dispute over the dismissal of Susan Monarez, director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), has intensified, with her attorneys asserting she will not leave unless the president himself takes action.Monarez was officially removed late on Wednesday following a heated exchange in which the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, attempted to oust her, according to the White House. Her lawyer has countered that Monarez has no intention of resigning.As she was confirmed by the Senate, unlike previous CDC directors, Monarez technically serves at the will of the president, so Kennedy alone may not have had the authority to terminate her.Monarez, an infectious disease expert, was sworn in just a month ago by Kennedy but soon found herself at odds with him over vaccine policy, according to individuals familiar with the matter. In the wake of her removal, four senior CDC leaders abruptly resigned, apparently out of frustration with Kennedy’s approach to vaccines and his management style.Here’s a breakdown of the CDC leaders involved.Susan Monarez Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention View image in fullscreenMonarez is a microbiologist with bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees from the University of Wisconsin. She joined the CDC as principal deputy director in January 2025, briefly served as acting director, and was confirmed by the Senate as the agency’s 21st director on 31 July. She became the first director without a medical degree and the first confirmed under a 2023 law.On 27 August, she was dismissed over conflicts about vaccine policy, a move her legal team has argued was improper because only the president has the authority to remove her.Debra HouryFormer chief medical officer and deputy director for program and science at the CDCView image in fullscreenHoury, a physician with degrees from Emory University and Tulane University, previously worked as an emergency doctor and at various facilities in Atlanta, as well as serving in academic leadership roles. At the CDC, she served as chief medical officer and deputy director for program and science.She resigned in late August 2025 following Monarez’s removal, citing the spread of vaccine misinformation, looming budget reductions and political meddling that she said undermined the agency’s mission.Demetre DaskalakisFormer director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the CDCView image in fullscreenDaskalakis, a public health physician known for his leadership in HIV prevention and vaccination programs, led the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. He received his medical degree from the NYU School of Medicine and completed postgraduate medical training at Harvard Medical School in 2003, before joining the CDC in 2020 as director of the division of HIV/Aids Prevention.He resigned from the CDC on 28 August, publishing a letter that denounced political interference, data manipulation and what he called a decline in scientific integrity.Daniel JerniganFormer director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDCView image in fullscreenJernigan, a longtime CDC official, directed the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases and played a key role in influenza and pandemic preparedness. Jernigan first joined the CDC’s epidemic intelligence service in 1994 and worked in the respiratory diseases branch on the prevention and control of bacterial respiratory pathogens.He left his position in August 2025 after Monarez’s ouster, joining other top officials in objecting to what they saw as the politicization of science and diminished trust in the agency’s leadership.Jennifer LaydenFormer director of office of public health data, science, technology at the CDCView image in fullscreenLayden, who led the office of public health data, surveillance, and technology at the CDC, focused on modernizing outbreak tracking and response systems. Layden received both her doctor of medicine and her doctorate in epidemiology from the University of Illinois at Chicago.Formerly Illinois’ chief medical officer, she also resigned after Monarez’s removal in August 2025, warning about the damaging effects of political influence on science-based decision-making. More