Science

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Impossible to rebuild’: NIH scientists say Trump cuts will imperil life-saving research

      by

      Last week, the office of management and budget (OMB) revealed plans to freeze all outside funding for National Institutes of Health research this fiscal year, but reversed course later that day, leaving the scientific community in a state of whiplash. A senior official at the NIH who spoke on condition of anonymity said this was just the latest in a “multi-prong” approach by the Trump administration to destroy American scientific research.In July, the National Cancer Institute, which is part of the NIH, updated its website to reflect Trump administration plans to significantly cut cancer research spending as well. Since January, the administration has been cancelling NIH grants, in some cases targeting other specific research areas, such as HIV treatment and prevention.“It’s really, really bad at NIH right now,” said the official, who added that researchers working outside the NIH have been unaware of the severity of the situation until recently, even though they have also faced funding upheaval since the winter.“The Trump administration is, for the first time in history, substantially intervening inside NIH to bring it under political control,” the official said. “That’s what we saw this week with the OMB freeze on funding.”“I think the core of it is that they want to destroy universities, or at least turn them into rightwing ideological factories,” the official said, since the majority of the NIH’s grants are distributed to researchers in universities, medical schools and similar institutions.In 2021, JD Vance gave a speech entitled The Universities Are the Enemy. The official said they were alarmed at how little universities are fighting back – many have settled with the administration, which has “gotten Columbia to completely knuckle under. One of America’s most significant universities and a place that is a worldwide magnet for talents. Same thing at Penn. Now they’re going after UCLA.”Institutions such as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have also stayed on the sidelines, refusing to sufficiently resist Trump, the official said.If the administration does manage to freeze NIH funding, it will push to rescind the funds permanently using a rescission motion, the official said. This type of motion only requires a simple majority of 50 votes to pass the Senate, instead of the supermajority necessary to beat a filibuster. Republicans would have enough votes to “ram through these motions to effectively cut the budget without Democrats in Congress weighing in. It’s an ongoing disaster.”Researchers at the many universities where the administration has frozen funding, such as Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, are starting to feel the gravity of the situation, said the official. Carole LaBonne, a biologist at Northwestern, said “university labs are hanging by a thread”, explaining that even though the OMB reversed its decision to freeze outside NIH funding, “the baseline reality is not much better”.Other recent changes at the NIH include allocating research grants all at once rather than over multiple years, so that fewer projects are funded. Reductions in cancer research funding also mean that only 4% of relevant grant applications will move forward. “This will effectively shut down cancer research in this country and destroy the careers of many scientists. This is devastating,” LaBonne said.The extreme uncertainty surrounding scientific research is also negatively affecting scientists’ mental health. “I do not know any faculty who are not incredibly stressed right now, wondering how long they will be able to keep their labs going and if/when they will have to let laboratory staff go,” LaBonne said. “It also very hard to motivate oneself to write grants, a painstaking and time-intensive processes, when there is a 96% chance it will not be funded.”Ryan Gutenkunst, who heads the department of molecular and cellular biology at the University of Arizona, said: “The chaos at NIH is definitely freaking [faculty and students] out and wasting huge amounts of emotional energy and time. We were emailing about the latest pause, only to find it unpaused hours later.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe senior NIH official found last week’s events unsurprising, they said: “They’re throwing everything at the wall to stop NIH from spending. What struck me was that many of my colleagues at universities were like, ‘Oh, my God, they’re stopping grants.’ And it really seemed to activate people in a way that I hadn’t seen before, whereas a lot of us at NIH thought, ‘Oh, they just did another thing.’”Science is an engine for American economic dominance, and scientific clusters such as Silicon Valley could not exist without federal funding, the official said. “Once you break them, it will be impossible to rebuild them. We’re on the path to breaking them.”LaBonne said she worried about the impact on progress in cancer specifically. “My own research touches on pediatric cancers. Forty years ago more than 60% of children diagnosed with cancer would have died within five years of diagnosis. Today there is a 90% survival rate. We should not put progress like that in danger,” she said.Although many major scientific institutions have complied with the administration, grassroots organizations and individual scientists, including those within the NIH, are finding ways to resist.The senior NIH official said they were most hopeful about grassroots organizers who are resisting the Trump administration openly, rather than relying on older strategies such as litigation and negotiations with Congress. For example, Science Homecoming, a website to promote science communication, is encouraging scientists to get the word out about the importance of federal funding to their home towns.The Bethesda Declaration, signed by 484 NIH staff, directly accused NIH director Jay Bhattacharya of “a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally appropriated funds for critical NIH research. Each day that the NIH continues to disrupt research, your ability to deliver on this duty narrows.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Hundreds of Nasa workers rebuke ‘arbitrary’ Trump cuts in scathing letter

      by

      Almost 300 current and former US Nasa employees, including at least four astronauts, have issued a scathing dissent opposing the Trump administration’s sweeping and indiscriminate cuts to the agency, which they say threaten safety, innovation and national security.The formal letter, titled The Voyager Declaration, is addressed to the acting Nasa administrator, Sean Duffy, a staunch Trump loyalist appointed on 7 July who is also his transportation secretary. The declaration, which is dedicated to 17 astronauts who have died in past spaceflight incidents, warns of catastrophic consequences if the proposed cuts to science grants, staffing and international missions are implemented.“Major programmatic shifts at Nasa must be implemented strategically so that risks are managed carefully,” the letter said. “Instead, the last six months have seen rapid and wasteful changes which have undermined our mission and caused catastrophic impacts on Nasa’s workforce.“We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political momentum over human safety, scientific advancement, and efficient use of public resources. These cuts are arbitrary and have been enacted in defiance of congressional appropriations law. The consequences for the agency and the country alike are dire.”The letter sounds the alarm over suggested changes to Nasa’s Technical Authority, a system of safety checks and balances established in the wake of the 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster that killed seven astronauts. “The culture of organizational silence promoted at Nasa over the last six months already represents a dangerous turn away from the lessons learned after the Columbia disaster,” the declaration states.The declaration has 131 named signatures – including at least 55 current Nasa employees – and 156 anonymous signatories. Interim administrator Duffy, a former television host who was appointed after the ousting of a longtime Nasa employee, Janet Petro, is the final step in the chain of Technical Authority command.Trump’s billionaire donor and former ally Elon Musk oversaw the loss of at least 2,600 of Nasa’s 17,000-plus employees, according to Politico, before the billionaire businessman stepped back from the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge). So far, at least $120m in Nasa grants have been terminated, and the White House has proposed slashing a quarter of the agency’s total budget for next year. International missions have been cancelled, and almost half the agency’s science budget could be cut in 2026.The signatories said they dissent from the indiscriminate cuts to Nasa research which supports national security by ensuring the US role as a global leader in science and technology. “Basic research in space science, aeronautics, and the stewardship of the Earth are inherently governmental functions that cannot and will not be taken up by the private sector,” the letter says.The Voyager Declaration, named after the twin Nasa spacecraft that are exploring interstellar space, is only the latest formal dissent against Trump’s unprecedented assault on science and federal agencies.In June, at least 300 employees at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published a declaration calling for the restoration of grants into life-saving treatments that the Trump administration had “delayed or terminated for political reasons”.Earlier in July, 140 workers at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were placed on administrative leave after signing a letter highlighting key concerns including a culture of fear at the agency, the cancellation of environmental justice programs and grants, undermining public trust and “ignoring scientific consensus to protect polluters”. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s EPA eliminates research and development office and begins layoffs

      by

      The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on Friday it is eliminating its research and development arm and reducing agency staff by thousands of employees. One union leader said the moves “will devastate public health in our country”.The agency’s office of research and development (ORD) has long provided the scientific underpinnings for the EPA’s mission to protect the environment and human health. The EPA said in May it would shift its scientific expertise and research efforts to program offices that focus on major issues such as air and water.The agency said on Friday it is creating a new office of applied science and environmental solutions that will allow it to focus on research and science “more than ever before”.Once fully implemented, the changes will save the EPA nearly $750m, officials said.Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the House science committee, called the elimination of the research office “a travesty”.“The Trump administration is firing hardworking scientists while employing political appointees whose job it is to lie incessantly to Congress and to the American people,” she said. “The obliteration of ORD will have generational impacts on Americans’ health and safety.”EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement that the changes announced Friday would ensure the agency “is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment, while Powering the Great American Comeback”.The EPA also said it is beginning the process to eliminate thousands of jobs, following asupreme court ruling last week that cleared the way for Donald Trump’s plans to downsize the federal workforce, despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of their jobs.Total staffing at EPA will go down to 12,448, a reduction of more than 3,700 employees, or nearly 23%, from staffing levels in January when Trump took office, the agency said.“This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars,” Zeldin said, using a government term for mass firings.The office of research and development “is the heart and brain of the EPA”, said Justin Chen, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents thousands of EPA employees.“Without it, we don’t have the means to assess impacts upon human health and the environment,” Chen said. “Its destruction will devastate public health in our country.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe research office – EPA’s main science arm – currently has 1,540 positions, excluding special government employees and public health officers, according to agency documents reviewed by Democratic staff on the House science panel earlier this year. As many as 1,155 chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists could be laid off, the documents indicated.The research office has 10 facilities across the country, stretching from Florida and North Carolina to Oregon. An EPA spokeswoman said that all laboratory functions currently conducted by the research office will continue.In addition to the reduction in force, the agency also is offering the third round of deferred resignations for eligible employees, including research office staff, spokeswoman Molly Vaseliou said. The application period is open until 25 July.The EPA’s announcement comes two weeks after the agency put on administrative leave 139 employees who signed a “declaration of dissent” with agency policies under the Trump administration. The agency accused the employees of “unlawfully undermining” Trump’s agenda.In a letter made public on 30June, the employees wrote that the EPA is no longer living up to its mission to protect human health and the environment. The letter represented rare public criticism from agency employees who knew they could face retaliation for speaking out.Associated Press contributed to reporting More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      DoJ drops charges against Utah doctor accused of destroying Covid vaccines

      by

      The US Department of Justice dropped charges on Saturday against Michael Kirk Moore, the Utah doctor accused of destroying more than $28,000 worth of government-provided Covid-19 vaccines and administering saline to children instead of the shot.Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, announced the news in a statement on the social media platform X, saying the charges had been dismissed under her direction.“Dr Moore gave his patients a choice when the federal government refused to do so,” Bondi said. “He did not deserve the years in prison he was facing.”According to a 2023 press release from the US attorney’s office in Utah, Moore distributed at least 1,937 fraudulent vaccination record cards in exchange for either direct payment or required donations to a specific charity. The minors he gave saline shots to were under the impression, at the request of their parents, that they were receiving a Covid-19 shot. Moore ran the operations from a plastic surgery center in Midvale, Utah, and was charged, along with three other co-defendants, with conspiracy to defraud the United States.Far-right congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene thanked Bondi in a statement on X and called Moore a “hero who refused to inject his patients with a government-mandated unsafe vaccine”.The Utah senator Mike Lee also weighed in, saying on X that he was glad Moore could remain a free man and that countless Americans endured lies and lockdowns during the pandemic.Moore was indicted by the justice department in 2023. He pleaded not guilty to the charges, which also included conspiracy to convert, sell, convey and dispose of government property, and the conversion, sale, conveyance and disposal of government property.The fake vaccination records were sold under Moore’s scheme for $50 each, and operations allegedly ran between May 2021 and September 2022. Attorneys for Moore argued that the regulations set at the time by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were unconstitutional.The charges against Moore were brought in when Joe Biden was president, but Covid-19 conspiracists and skeptics have been embraced in the new administration under Trump.Recently, the Trump administration canceled a $766m award to Moderna on the research and development of H5N1 bird flu vaccines, and officials announced new restrictions and regulations for Covid mRNA vaccines.The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has for decades baselessly sowed doubt about vaccine safety, contrary to scientific research, thanked Moore in a statement on X back in April.“Dr Moore deserves a medal for his courage and his commitment to healing,” Kennedy Jr said. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr’s ‘Maha’ report found to contain citations to nonexistent studies

      by

      Robert F Kennedy Jr’s flagship health commission report contains citations to studies that do not exist, according to an investigation by the US publication Notus.The report exposes glaring scientific failures from a health secretary who earlier this week threatened to ban government scientists from publishing in leading medical journals.The 73-page “Make America healthy again” report – which was commissioned by the Trump administration to examine the causes of chronic illness, and which Kennedy promoted it as “gold-standard” science backed by more than 500 citations – includes references to seven studies that appear to be entirely invented, and others that the researchers say have been mischaracterized.Two supposed studies on ADHD medication advertising simply do not exist in the journals where they are claimed to be published. Virginia Commonwealth University confirmed to Notus that researcher Robert L Findling, listed as an author of one paper, never wrote such an article, while another citation leads only to the Kennedy report itself when searched online.Harold J Farber, a pediatric specialist supposedly behind research on asthma overprescribing, told Notus he never wrote the cited paper and had never worked with the other listed authors.The US Department of Health and Human Services has not immediately responded to a Guardian request for comment.The citation failures come as Kennedy, a noted skeptic of vaccines, criticized medical publishing this week, branding top journals the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine and Jama as “corrupt” and alleging they were controlled by pharmaceutical companies. He outlined plans for creating government-run journals instead.Beyond the phantom studies in Kennedy’s report, Notus found it systematically misrepresented existing research.For example, one paper was claimed to show that talking therapy was as effective as psychiatric medication, but the statistician Joanne McKenzie said this was impossible, as “we did not include psychotherapy” in the review.The sleep researcher Mariana G Figueiro also said her study was mischaracterized, with the report incorrectly stating it involved children rather than college students, and citing the wrong journal entirely.The Trump administration asked Kennedy for the report in order to look at chronic illness causes, from pesticides to mobile phone radiation. Kennedy called it a “milestone” that provides “evidence-based foundation” for sweeping policy changes.A follow-up “Make our children healthy again strategy” report is due in August, raising concerns about the scientific credibility underpinning the administration’s health agenda. More

    • 200 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s new ‘gold standard’ rule will destroy American science as we know it | Colette Delawalla

      by

      Science is under siege.On Friday evening, the White House released an executive order called Restoring Gold Standard Science. At face value, this order promises a commitment to federally funded research that is “transparent, rigorous, and impactful” and policy that is informed by “the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available”. But hidden beneath the scientific rhetoric is a plan that would destroy scientific independence in the US by giving political appointees the latitude to dismiss entire bodies of research and punish researchers who fail to fall in line with the current administration’s objectives. In other words: this is Fool’s-Gold Standard Science.According to the order, “Gold Standard Science means science conducted in a manner that is:(i) reproducible;(ii) transparent;(iii) communicative of error and uncertainty;(iv) collaborative and interdisciplinary;(v) skeptical of its findings and assumptions;(vi) structured for falsifiability of hypotheses;(vii) subject to unbiased peer review;(viii) accepting of negative results as positive outcomes; and(ix) without conflicts of interest.”The order mimics the language of an active reform movement in science to increase rigor and transparency of research – a movement commonly called the open science movement, to which some of us are contributors. Science is, by nature, a continuous work in progress, constantly self-scrutinized and always looking for opportunities to improve. We should all be able to celebrate any administration’s investment in improving the openness, integrity and reproducibility of research.But, with this executive order, we cannot.Instead of being about open science, it grants administration-aligned political appointees the power to designate any research as scientific misconduct based on their own “judgment” and includes the power to punish the scientists involved accordingly; this would weaponize government counter to the public interest.The consequences of state-dictated science can be catastrophic. When Trofim Lysenko, a researcher who denied the reality of genetic inheritance and natural selection, won favor with Joseph Stalin and took control of agriculture in the Soviet Union, thousands of scientists who disagreed with him were fired, imprisoned or killed. His disastrous agricultural prescriptions ultimately led to famines that killed millions in the USSR and in China.Science does not proceed by sequentially establishing unassailable conclusions, but rather by steadily accumulating numerous lines of evidence, scrutinizing weaknesses, and pursuing additional evidence. Almost any study, any source of evidence, any conclusion, falls short of meeting every aspect of the White House’s list of best practices. This has nothing to do with laziness, let alone misconduct by individual scientists; it’s simply a consequence of the fact that science is difficult. Scientists constantly grapple with uncertainty, and nevertheless can ultimately arrive at robust, valid conclusions, such as the fact that vaccines do not cause autism, and that the burning of fossil fuels is warming the planet and wreaking havoc on our climate.Under the terms of the executive order, political appointees loyal to the president can willfully find justification to label any research finding as scientific misconduct, and then penalize the researchers involved accordingly. This administration has already appropriated the language of open science to assert control over and deal heavy blows to the scientific ecosystem of the United States – including cancelling thousands of active research grants in climate science, misinformation and disinformation, vaccines, mental health, women’s health, LGBTQ+ health and stem education. Calls to “revisit” decades of work that establish vaccine safety beyond a shadow of a doubt “because the only way you can get good science is through replication”, and demands for unethical vaccine clinical trial practices and additional data, further echo the bad-faith adoption of open science language.Trump has also advanced a congressional budget calling for massive cuts to federal spending on research and development and levied significant retaliation against universities that have not fallen in line with his demands. He has gone so far as to propose a rule change by the office of personnel management that would install policy police at all levels of federal agencies, converting thousands of employees into presidential appointees who can be summarily fired without due process for any arbitrary political reason. This new executive order raises the concern that many of our best scientists would be targeted in Lysenkoist purges. Meanwhile, the threat of such actions is already having a chilling effect on all scientists.Science is the most important long-term investment for humanity. Interference in the scientific process by political arbiters stifles scientists’ freedom of speech and thought. Science depends on unfettered speech – free and continuous discussion of data and ideas. We, like the rest of the scientific community, aspire to achieve greater openness, integrity and reproducibility of research to accelerate discovery, advance treatments and foster solutions to meet society’s greatest challenges. Meeting that objective will not occur by centralizing power over science and scientists according to the whims of any political administration. We see this executive order for what it is: an attempt to sell the US’s future for pyrite.

      Colette Delawalla is a PhD candidate at Emory University and executive director of Stand Up for Science. Victor Ambros is a 2024 Nobel laureate in physiology or medicine at the Chan Medical School, University of Massachusetts. Carl Bergstrom is professor of biology at the University of Washington. Carol Greider is a 2009 Nobel laureate in medicine and distinguished professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Michael Mann is the presidential distinguished professor of earth and environmental science and director of the Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media at the University of Pennsylvania. Brian Nosek is executive director of the Center for Open Science and professor of psychology at the University of Virginia More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Flooding could end southern Appalachia’: the scientists on an urgent mission to save lives

      by

      The abandoned homes and razed lots along the meandering Troublesome Creek in rural eastern Kentucky is a constant reminder of the 2022 catastrophic floods that killed dozens of people and displaced thousands more.Among the hardest hit was Fisty, a tiny community where eight homes, two shops and nine people including a woman who uses a wheelchair, her husband and two children, were swept away by the rising creek. Some residents dismissed cellphone alerts of potential flooding due to mistrust and warning fatigue, while for others it was already too late to escape. Landslides trapped the survivors and the deceased for several days.In response, geologists from the University of Kentucky secured a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and raced around collecting perishable data in hope of better understanding the worst flooding event to hit the region in a generation.View image in fullscreenOn a recent morning in Fisty, Harold Baker sat smoking tobacco outside a new prefabricated home while his brother James worked on a car in a makeshift workshop. With no place else to go, the Baker family rebuilt the workshop on the same spot on Troublesome Creek with financial assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema).“I feel depressed, everyone else is gone now. The days are long. It feels very lonely when the storms come in,” said Baker, 55, whose four dogs also drowned in 2022. With so few people left, the car repair business is way down, the road eerily quiet.Since the flood that took everything, Harold and James patrol the river every time it rains. The vigilance helped avert another catastrophe on Valentine’s Day after another so-called generational storm. No one died but the trauma, like the river, came roaring back.“I thought we were going to lose everything again, it was scary,” said Baker.At this spot in July 2022, geologist Ryan Thigpen found flood debris on top of two-storey buildings – 118in (3 metres) off the ground. The water mark on Harold’s new trailer shows the February flood hit 23in.Troublesome creek is a 40-mile narrow tributary of the north fork of the Kentucky River, which, like many waterways across southern Appalachia, does not have a single gauge. Yet these rural mountain hollers are getting slammed over and over by catastrophic flooding – and landslides – as the climate crisis increases rainfall across the region and warmer waters in the Gulf of Mexico turbocharge storms.Two years after 45 people died in the 2022 floods, the scale of disaster grew with Hurricane Helene, which killed more than 230 people with almost half the deaths in Appalachia, after days of relentless rain turned calm streams into unstoppable torrents.Another 23 people died during the February 2025 rains, then 24 more in April during a four-day storm that climate scientists found was made significantly more likely and more severe by the warming planet.View image in fullscreenThe extreme weather is making life unbearable and economically unviable for a chronically underserved region where coal was once king, and climate skepticism remains high. Yet little is known about flooding in the Appalachian region. It’s why the geologists – also called earth scientists – got involved.“This is where most people are going to die unless we create reliable warning systems and model future flood risks for mitigation and to help mountain communities plan for long-term resilience. Otherwise, these extreme flooding events could be the end of southern Appalachia,” said Thigpen.Amid accelerating climate breakdown the urgency of the mission is clear. Yet this type of applied science could be derailed – or at least curtailed – by the unprecedented assault on science, scientists and federal agencies by Donald Trump and his billionaire donors.Danielle Baker, Harold’s sister-in-law (James’s wife), had her bags packed a week in advance of the February flood and was glued to local television weather reports, which, like the geologists, rely on meteorological forecasting by the taxpayer-funded National Weather Service (NWS).She was “scared to death” watching the creek rise so high again. But this time the entire family, including 11 dogs and several cats, evacuated to the church on the hill where they waited 26 hours for the water to subside.View image in fullscreen“The people in this community are the best you could meet, but it’s a ghost town now. I didn’t want to rebuild so close to the creek, but we had nowhere else to go. Every time it rains, I can’t sleep,” she said, wiping away tears with her shirt.Danielle was unaware of Trump’s plans to dismantle Fema and slash funding from the NWS and NSF. “A lot of people here would not know what to do without Fema’s help. We need more information about the weather, better warnings, because the rains are getting worse,” she said.A day after the Guardian’s visit in mid-May, a NWS office in eastern Kentucky scrambled to cover the overnight forecast as severe storms moved through the region, triggering multiple tornadoes that eventually killed 28 people. Hundreds of staff have left the NWS in recent months, through a combination of layoffs and buyouts at the behest of Trump mega-donor Elon Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge).Yet statewide, two-thirds of Kentuckians voted for Trump last year, with his vote share closer to 80% in rural communities hit hard by extreme weather, where many still blame Barack Obama for coal mine closures.“It doesn’t matter if people don’t believe in climate change. It’s going to wallop them anyway. We need to think about watersheds differently. This is a new world of extremes and cascading hazards,” said Thigpen, the geologist.The rapidly changing climate is rendering the concept of once-in-a-generation floods, which is mostly based on research by hydrologists going back a hundred years or so, increasingly obsolete. Geologists, on the other hand, look back 10,000 years, which could help better understand flooding patterns when the planet was warmer.Thigpen is spearheading this close-knit group of earth scientists from the university’s hazards team based in Lexington. On a recent field trip, nerdy jokes and constant teasing helped keep the mood light, but the scientists are clearly affected by the devastation they have witnessed since 2022. The team has so far documented more than 3,000 landslides triggered by that single extreme rain event, and are still counting.View image in fullscreenThis work is part of a broader statewide push to increase climate resiliency and bolster economic growth using Kentucky-specific scientific research. Last year, the initiative got a major boost when the state secured $24m from the NSF for a five-year research project involving eight Kentucky institutions that has created dozens of science jobs and hundreds of new student opportunities.The grant helped pay for high-tech equipment – drones, radars, sensors and computers – the team needs to collect data and build models to improve hazard prediction and create real-time warning systems.View image in fullscreenAfter major storms, the team measures water levels and analyzes the sediment deposits left behind to calculate the scale and velocity of the flooding, which in turn helps calibrate the model.The models help better understand the impact of the topography and each community’s built and natural environment – important for future mitigation. In these parts, coal was extracted using mountaintop mine removal, which drastically altered the landscape. Mining – and redirected waterways – can affect the height of a flood, according to a recent study by PhD student Meredith Swallom.A paleo-flood project is also under way, and another PhD student, Luciano Cardone, will soon begin digging into a section of the Kentucky riverbank to collect layers of sediment that holds physical clues on the date, size and velocity of ancient floods. Cardone, who found one local missionary’s journal describing flooding in 1795, will provide a historical or geological perspective to catastrophic flooding in the region, which the team believe will help better predict future hazards under changing climatic conditions.View image in fullscreenAll this data is analyzed at the new lab located in the Kentucky Geological Survey (KGS) department where super-powerful computers are positioned around a ceiling-to-floor black board, with a groovy lamp and artwork to get the creative mathematical juices flowing.So far the team has developed one working flood risk model for a single section of the Kentucky River. This will serve as a template, as each watershed requires its own model so that the data is manageable, precise and useful.This sort of applied science has the capacity to directly improve the lives of local people, including many Trump voters, as well as benefiting other mountainous flood-prone areas across the US and globally. But a flood warning system can only work if there is reliable meteorological forecasting going forward.Reports suggest NWS weather balloons, which assess storm risk by measuring wind speed, humidity, temperature and other conditions that satellites may not detect, have been canceled in recent weeks from Nebraska to Florida due to staff shortages. At the busiest time for storm predictions, deadly heatwaves and wildfires, weather service staffing is down by more than 10% and, for the first time in almost half a century, some forecasting offices no longer have 24/7 cover.Trump’s team is also threatening to slash $1.52bn from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), the weather service’s parent agency, which also monitors climate trends, manages coastal ecosystems and supports international shipping, among other things.“To build an effective and trusted warning system we need hyper-local data, including accurate weather forecasts and a more robust network of gauges,” said Summer Brown, a senior lecturer at the University of Kentucky’s earth and environmental sciences department. “The thought of weakening our basic weather data is mind-boggling.”View image in fullscreenIt’s impossible not to worry about the cuts, especially as the grand plan is to create a southern Appalachian flood and hazard centre to better understand and prepare the entire region’s mountain communities for extreme weather and related hazards, including flash floods, landslides and tornadoes.For this, the team is currently awaiting a multimillion-dollar grant decision from the NSF, in what until recently was a merit-based, peer-reviewed process at the federal agency. The NSF director resigned in April after orders from the White House to accept a 55% cut to the $9bn budget and fire half of its 1,700-person staff. Then in an unprecedented move, a member of the governing body stepped down, lambasting Musk’s unqualified Doge team for interfering in grant decisions.The NSF is the principal federal investor in basic science and engineering, and the proposed cut will be devastating in the US and globally.“Rivers are different all over Appalachia, and if our research continues we can build accurate flood and landslide models that help communities plan for storms in a changing climate,” said Jason Dortch, who set up the flood lab. “We’ve submitted lots of great grant proposals, and while that is out of our hands, we will continue to push forwarded however we can.”Fleming-Neon is a former mining community in Letcher county with around 500 residents – a decline of almost 40% in the past two decades. The town was gutted by the 2022 storm, and only two businesses, a car repair shop and a florist, reopened. The launderette, pharmacy, dentist, clothing store and thrift shop were all abandoned.View image in fullscreenRandall and Bonnie Kincer, a local couple who have been married for 53 years, run the flower shop from an old movie theater on main street, which doubles up as a dance studio for elementary school children. The place was rammed with 120in of muddy water in 2022. In February it was 52in, and everything still reeks of mould.The couple have been convinced by disinformation spread by conspiracy theorists that the recent catastrophic floods across the region, including Helene, were down to inadequate river dredging and cloud seeding. The town’s sorry plight, according to the Kincers, is down to deliberate manipulation of the weather system paid for by mining companies to flood out the community in order to gain access to lithium. (There are no significant lithium deposits in the area.)Bonnie, 74, is on the brink of giving up on the dance classes that she has taught since sophomore year, but not on Trump. “I have total confidence in President Trump. The [federal] cuts will be tough for a little while but there’s a lot of waste, so it will level out,” said Bonnie, who is angry about not qualifying for Fema assistance.View image in fullscreen“We used all our life savings fixing the studio. But I cannot shovel any more mud, not even for the kids. I am done. I have PTSD, we are scared to death,” she said breaking down in tears several times.The fear is understandable. On the slope facing the studio, a tiered retainer wall has been anchored into the hill to stabilize the earth and prevent an avalanche from destroying the town below.And at the edge of town, next to the power station on an old mine site, is a towering pile of black sludgy earth littered with lumps of shiny coal – the remnants of a massive landslide that happened as residents cleaned up after the February storm.Thomas Hutton’s house was swamped with muddy water after the landslide blocked the creek, forcing it to temporarily change course towards a residential street. “The floods have made this a ghost town. I doubt it will survive another one. If you mess with Mother Nature, you lose,” said Hutton, 74, a retired miner.View image in fullscreenThe geologists fly drones fitted with Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) – a remote sensing technology that uses pulsed lasers to create high-res, 3D, color models of the Earth’s surface, and can shoot through trees and man-made structures to detect and monitor changes in terrain including landslides. The affordability and precision of the China-made Lidar has been a “game-changer” for landslides, but prices have recently rocketed thanks to Trump’s tariff war.The Lidar picked up fairly recent deforestation above the Fleming-Neon power plant, which likely further destabilized the earth. The team agrees that the landslide could keep moving, but without good soil data it’s impossible to know when.Last year’s NSF grant funded new soil and moisture sensors, and mini weather stations, which the landslide team is in the process of installing on 14 steep slopes in eastern Kentucky – the first time this has been done – including one opposite Hutton’s house.Back at the lab, the geologists will use the data the sensors send back every 15 minutes to create models – and eventually a website where residents and local emergency managers can see how the soil moisture is changing in real time. The end goal is to warn communities when there is a high landslide risk based on the soil saturation – and rain forecast.“We have taken so many resources from these slopes, we need to understand them better,” said Sarah Johnson, a landslide expert. “We’re not sitting in an ivory tower making money from research. The work we do is about making communities safer.” More

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Now is the time for scientists to stand up against Trump’s repressive agenda | Daniel Malinsky

      by

      There is a stereotype that the natural political activists in academia are the humanities professors: literary scholars, social theorists and critics of culture are the ones who speak truth to power and fight back against oppression.Yet scientists also ought to stand up and organize against the Trump administration’s attacks – not only the attacks on scientific research and integrity, but also the attacks on immigrants, on political speech and on democracy. Scientists cannot see themselves as above the fray but rather in coalition with other workers resisting authoritarianism.History is replete with examples of scientists that have taken on great risks to resist authoritarianism. The Dutch neurologist GGJ Rademaker reorganized his laboratory into a base of resistance (complete with printing press, radio equipment and hidden weapons) against fascist forces in the Nazi-occupied Netherlands. Some German scientists, including the psychoanalyst John Rittmeister and biochemist Heinrich Wieland, opposed the Nazi regime by hiding Jews and distributing banned anti-fascist literature. Brave German scientists even aided the Allied forces during the second world war.At this year’s meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research, the CEO of this research society, Margaret Foti, encouraged cancer scientists to take part in demonstrations and meetings with elected representatives. Professors from all corners of campus are already fighting back against funding cuts, the attempted deportations of our international students and usurpations of democratic governance. At Columbia, where I work, faculty have been organizing to urge our university leadership to provide real protections to students at risk of deportation and sue the Trump administration, among other demands. Contrary to the stereotype, much of the organizing work is being spearheaded by science faculty – psychiatrists, epidemiologists, astronomers, mathematicians, economists, statisticians, oceanographers – hand in hand with our colleagues in the humanities.Despite the notion that scientists are and should be cautious or apolitical, professors in the sciences are well-suited to political activism. The work of political organizing is not so different from the work of managing a research lab: skills in divvying up tasks, managing people with sensitivity and foresight, and creating clear, compelling narratives to communicate accomplishments (eg to peer reviewers reading our manuscripts) are all clearly transferrable to activism. All science professors were once science students, doing the typically monotonous labor of scientific work, spending hours carefully tinkering in the laboratory, debugging computer code, or meticulously collecting information on the human or natural world. Often political activity involves straightforward but time-consuming tasks such as printing leaflets or making phone calls to representatives. Sometimes there are simple logistics that need taking care of in organizing a protest march. Some activism involves strategizing in coalitions to distribute needed resources or build supportive institutions. None of this is as difficult as “rocket science” and it is in fact remarkably similar to the more banal parts of everyday science.Many recent actions taken by the Trump administration impinge quite obviously on the expertise of scientists: the attacks on federal research funding, the rollback of decades-long protections of our environment and human health, the excising of research specifically related to climate change or vaccine development. Robert F Kennedy Jr has recently promised to dedicate scientific resources to studying the alleged relationship between autism and vaccination – a question that has been addressed by dozens of studies and on which the scientific consensus to the contrary is clear – and thrown the weight of the government behind stigmatizing and dangerous initiatives related to autism, contested by experts and advocates. Donald Trump has also taken steps to sabotage congressionally mandated research on the climate crisis by dismissing expert authors of the National Climate Assessment. Opposing these moves and organizing against them as scientists is a no-brainer. Yet also scientists must fight tooth and nail against the secretive and seemingly baseless incarceration of immigrants, the usurpation of democratic checks and balances, and the reorganization of society along ever more hateful lines. These things affect all of us regardless of our job descriptions. It should go without saying that scientific inquiry cannot flourish in a society dominated by fear, censorship and hate.Scientists are drawn to the work we do for many different reasons, but I would venture that for most of us there is an underlying goal of advancing humanity – whether that is by finding cures to disease, new technology or more abstractly by pushing the boundaries of human knowledge so that future generations are better off. All of that is at risk if we remain “neutral” or “apolitical” at the wrong moment in history. Though there is a plausible argument for erring on the side of “apolitical” in normal times, to ensure trust and guard against undue politicization of scientific work, the argument stretches thin and breaks down given our current political environment and apparent slide toward fascism. Our scientific research itself must remain free from prejudice and aimed wherever the truth may lead, but the work before us is not only scientific research. We must also work to preserve the conditions of life that make both science and society flourish. In these times that means that scientists have a duty to dissent.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion

      Daniel Malinsky is an assistant professor of biostatistics in the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University More