SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " scientist " 6,705 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
The Government's Earthquake Warning System Has a 30% Accuracy Rate. Scientists Found Something Better
Researchers tested a new technique that uses fiber optic cables to detect earthquakes. It’s twice as precise as what the government currently uses.
Drifting SpaceX rocket heading for accidental collision with moon
Scientists and sky gazers will watch intently as rocket’s upper stage slams into lunar surface on Wednesday
Thousands of people in China have had banned Alzheimer's surgery
Surgery that aims to enhance the clearance of Alzheimer's-associated proteins from the brain has been banned in China, but only after thousands of people had the procedure
Scientists admit: the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs wasn’t what we thought - Futura-Sciences
The Scene of the Crime: Chicxulub and the Prehistoric Apocalypse About 66 million years ago, an asteroid roughly 6 miles wide (10 kilometers!) crashed into what is now the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico. The resulting impact gouged out a crater nearly 112 miles across (around 180 kilometers)—buried today under layers...
Scientists discover why poor sleep may harm some brains more
A gene involved in the brain’s overnight cleaning system may change how strongly poor sleep affects Alzheimer’s-related brain changes. The findings point toward more personalized prevention strategies based on both genetics and sleep habits.
Shining a light on colloid science
Scientists and engineers gather to discuss impact of colloid science in our lives
Does public health *need* MAHA?
Last week, our friend Dr. Craig Spencer sparked an ongoing volatile discussion with his Atlantic article “Public Health Needs MAHA.” Some have come out in strong dissent, others are cheering, and others are simply lamenting that we find ourselves in such a divided world to begin with. We will dare to dip our toes in these controversial waters, too. Does public health need MAHA? We think in some ways yes, and in other ways, no. MAHA leaders versus the everyday MAHA supporter The vitriol in this debate mostly comes from one collapsed distinction: the leadership of MAHA is not necessarily the same as the people who support it. Say “MAHA” and most people picture RFK Jr. Fair enough, as he coined the term and holds most of the power. And, yes, some MAHA followers treat Kennedy as something close to a saint. But talk to the grassroots, and it’s not a monolith. They’re Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. People who distrust vaccines and vaccine supporters. It’s a wide, eclectic coalition. The data backs this too: 4 in 10 Americans support the movement—that’s a lot of people! But according to polls, vaccines and medical choice (the issues most tied to Kennedy personally) are cited by only 4% as their reason for supporting the movement. For many, the motivations are much broader. Many MAHA supporters are signing up for the idea that “something needs to change” with health in this country. They’re asking good-faith questions about corporate influence on our health systems, health care costs, nutrition, chemicals, and clean air and water. These are all questions that plenty of public health professionals recognize as legitimate and also care about very deeply. Blurring the lines between the leadership and grassroots does real damage in two important ways: It hands the 4 in 10 exactly the narrative already fed—that the health ecosystem doesn’t listen, doesn’t care, and paints every critic with the same brush. It gives the actual bad actor more power. RFK Jr. has done irreparable damage and can’t be trusted. What the MAHA movement gets right A healthy population is something the public health field was literally built on, and many of these topics are things we have dedicated our lives to. Yet the MAHA movement has captivated nearly half the country in a way the public health establishment has failed to achieve. So that means MAHA is doing something right. Some of it may be timing (after a Covid-19 pandemic and deep frustration and mistrust with institutions). The movement also does three other things really well: 1. It gives a new, louder voice to system failures. While MAHA is not a monolith, one theme stays consistent across their stories: the system failed them. For some, it was the system that flooded their communities with opioids and then walked away. For others, it was the system that let their business collapse during Covid with no safety net in sight. For others still, it was the system that failed to help them manage a complex chronic illness, bouncing them from physician to physician without any real answers. And in many ways, our health ecosystems are failing Americans. Why are medical bills so incomprehensible? Why do some kids get a healthy school lunch and others don’t? Why do an epidemiologist and a MD/PhD student have to start newsletters in the middle of the biggest public health emergency in a century, just so people can get straight information? Because the systems failed. This deep-seated frustration driving many Americans to search for solutions elsewhere needs to be recognized. 2. MAHA has brilliant comms central to their efforts. MAHA figured out something most health institutions still have not: the information landscape changed. It’s participatory now, not top-down; influence runs through many nodes in a community, not one institution; and storytelling and telling audiences “what you really think” moves people more than data dumps do. MAHA goes where audiences are listening, using podcasts, social media, and memes in ways most health institutions would scoff at—but it works. 3. They are very good at organizing. A MAHA meeting feels like a rally: energy, speakers, music, and most importantly, an action for everyone. Someone’s writing the next policy brief, someone’s seeding a narrative, someone knows the next legislative deadline, someone’s sending the text messages for a campaign. None of this is new (ask the civil rights movement), but MAHA knows it works and has capitalized on it. What MAHA gets wrong This list could be much longer, and this newsletter has spent a lot of time covering it, but here are a few things: Poor use of scientific evidence. This is the fundamental problem with many MAHA policies: the hype outpaces the science, and experts are often villainized for pointing this out. MAHA leadership has traded real solutions for cheap wins. For example, instead of taking on the powerful food industry and passing real reforms, it has celebrated french fries made of beef tallow and taken out artificial dyes from still very sugary children’s cereal. These changes won’t move the needle on America’s diet. MAHA leadership has tried to dismantle vaccine access in the U.S. While many MAHA supporters emphasize other issues, the effort to change vaccine policy has become MAHA’s signature effort. This is not surprising given RFK Jr.’s extensive track record campaigning against vaccines. It has rallied behind the wrong leader. RFK Jr. has a decades-long track record of villifying doctors, scientists, and public health workers, well before he became HHS secretary. He is known for his decades-long work sowing distrust in vaccines as well as life-saving treatments like antiretroviral therapy for HIV. This is not a serious person who can move the needle on health in the U.S, and he has already done serious damage. Public health needs more than defense Defending the evidence is absolutely necessary so health in the U.S. doesn’t move further backward. The public health establishment is very good at defense. The problem is this defense often sounds like defending the status quo, which has failed many people. Public health needs to offer an alternative to RFK Jr.’s MAHA—one that is rooted in evidence, truly listens to and addresses people’s frustrations, and has innovative solutions and the courage to change the systems. How do we get there? Find common ground. Do you know what most people care most about? The abysmal cost of healthcare. Start there. Fight for the human loudly. Too often, communications and engagement center on science with a capital S, funding mechanisms, or the CDC/FDA/NIH. Not the person. So the public doesn’t see themselves in it. Instead, they see people fighting for the very powerful systems that they feel negatively impact their health and well-being. Let the public feel and hear that you see their frustrations, you get it, and you’re fighting for them within the system. Recognize when pro-science messages are alienating people. Facts absolutely matter, but angrily venting only alienates people further. Our friend Elisabeth Marnik recently wrote a New York Times article about her experience growing up unvaccinated and how listening and empathetic conversation are the only ways to reach people that really work (a position backed by communication science). Her comments section was full of hateful comments from pro-vaccine individuals attacking her for daring to suggest we approach vaccine-hesitant individuals with empathy. It is possible to both stand firm behind scientific evidence and empathize with people who don’t trust it. Lean into politics smartly. Often, public health has shied away from politics: Don’t touch it, lest you get burned. But this fails to recognize that the third rail is what fuels the train: who is elected determines our budgets, our priorities, and our authority. Being political means being very savvy in strategy on both sides of the aisle, knowing your audience, and recognizing that political capital is as scarce as financial resources and needs to be allocated accordingly. Bottom line So does public health need MAHA? That’s not really the right question. Public health has a responsibility not to dismiss 40% of the country who feel heard by this movement and are frustrated that the system has failed them. And it has a responsibility to stick to the evidence and recognize MAHA leadership for what it is: a danger to our nation’s health. Both can, and should, be done. Love, YLE and KP A big thanks to Craig Spencer, who had the courage to put his neck out there to start a much-needed discussion at such a critical moment—one that is determining the identity of an entire field. Kristen Panthagani, MD, PhD is completing an emergency medicine residency and research fellowship focusing on health literacy and communication. In her free time, she writes the newsletters You Can Know Things debunking health myths and rumors and The Public Health Roundup. Views expressed belong to KP, not her employer. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
Opinion | Trump’s funding threat is anti-science, not scientists’ fault
Trump’s proposal would substitute political, ideological, and religious considerations for scientific criteria.
Scientists uncover how muscles preserve their repair cells
Researchers discovered an unexpected role for TRF2 in preserving muscle stem cell identity, offering new insights into muscle regeneration and muscular dystrophy.
Scientists have found a new way molecules can cooperate at room temperature
What if glowing molecules could synchronize, much like fireflies flashing in unison? Researchers have discovered that molecules confined within tiny gold nanostructures can behave collectively, coordinating ...
‘There was no other option’: Inside Fauci’s intensely planned hearing strategy
Dr. Anthony Fauci arrived at a high-stakes Senate hearing on Wednesday with a single, modest goal: Survive. The former top government scientist felt he accomplished that mission, people close to Fauci told CNN.
Human-caused climate change made Spanish, French fires much more likely, scientists calculate
Two new studies reveal climate change's fingerprints over extreme fire weather-triggering infernos in Spain and France. Researchers at World Weather Attribution found human-caused climate change made Spain's record fire 20 times more likely and doubled the chances of extreme fire conditions in Fr...
Scientists discover 2 new 'ghost' lineages that contributed DNA to modern humans
A new method of analyzing modern humans' DNA is revealing secrets about our extinct ancestors.
Before dinosaurs: scientists uncover the shocking cosmic event that changed Earth - Futura-Sciences
Asteroids, Meteorites, and Humanity’s Long Fascination For thousands of years, people have witnessed meteorites falling from the sky. Fascinating and fearsome, such events sparked myths and legends long before science explained their origin. Yet, it wasn’t until January 1, 1801, when Giuseppe Piazzi discovered Ceres—a dwarf planet a little under...
‘This Is Very Strange’: Ancient Smallpox May Have Been Less Deadly
Scientists have found smallpox viruses in the remains of people in Chile from around 500 years ago, revealing how the virus may have evolved into a global killer.
Everyone alive may carry DNA from a ‘ghost lineage’ of human ancestors
Scientists analyzing modern genomes may have found a long-lost branch of the human family tree
Scientists discover six hidden volcanoes hiding off the Sicilian coast - Futura-Sciences
“We were quite surprised, because we were really very close to the coast.” — Lodolo, researcher at Italy’s National Institute of Oceanography and Applied Geophysics. His team named the volcano Actea. It turned out to be one of six previously unknown volcanoes scattered across the Sicily Channel. An expedition finds...
Scientists Unearth Mechanism That Helps Plants “Feel Full”
NYU researchers determine how plants sense nitrogen sufficiency—and what this means for addressing global challenges related to fertilizers
Scientists advance space agriculture for future moon and Mars missions
Space isn't known for rich soil or ideal agricultural conditions anywhere in the solar system. Yet amid extreme temperatures and vast distances, multidisciplinary teams at USF's Aerospace: Science, Technology, ...
Scientists Figured Out How to ‘Edit’ Your Memories. It Could Free Your Mind.
For decades, memories were thought to be permanent, but new science is reshaping how we might think about our past.
Ice Age humans preferred hunting female woolly mammoths
Scientists also found a mammoth that was neither biologically female or male.
Origami-inspired sensor could continuously monitor our vital signs
A tiny sensor that unfolds within the body could continuously monitor our heart activity and breathing after showing promise in rats
How Scientists With Cancelled ‘Woke’ Grants Kept Going
‘We basically had all of the banned words,’ one environmental equity researcher says. So they got scrappy.
The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift
This edition of PN is made possible by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️ 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps. Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) [ Harmeet Dhillon demonstrates danger of posting through it ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Liz Dye · Jul 29 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.” Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies. While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements. Science for dummies Part of how you can tell this isn’t a document about science is that you are immediately faced with an absolute wall of business-speak of the worst sort. Did you know we must “tightly couple our science and technology enterprises to ensure that groundbreaking ideas invented in the United States are rapidly prototyped, tested, manufactured, and scaled domestically”? You do now! That tone isn’t surprising, because Kratsios has no background in science or research. He has a bachelor’s in political science and spent most of his career working for Peter Thiel at Thiel Capital. After a stint in the first Trump administration as Chief Technology Officer, where he also did not do any science, Kratsios was tasked in 2020 with overseeing the Pentagon’s research budget for a brief time, a position that, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “carries a great deal of power in terms of dictating investment allocations.” He spent the Biden years at Scale AI as “head of strategy,” which you will also note is neither a science nor a research job. But Scale AI has contracts with the Department of Defense and, as the Washington Post wrote in 2023, “has been aggressively pitching itself as the company that will help the US military in its existential battle with China.” And now you have the necessary background for our new golden age, which is going to be a golden age of taking money away from scientists and universities and giving it to companies like Scale AI. A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like Lisa takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please become one to support our work. 👇 Subscribe In a genuinely galling move, Katsios spends a lot of time slamming universities because of “administrative burdens on researchers” and the “well-documented inefficiencies” in academia, the message being that those damn universities waste the time of amazing researchers with paperwork. Except it’s the administration that is attempting to impose inefficient, unnecessary burdens on those researchers with a proposed Office of Management and Budget rule that would require senior political appointees to approve every science grant and ensure it aligns with Trump’s personal priorities. Researchers would also have to seek prior government approval to attend conferences or publicize their research. And political appointees could terminate any grant at any time if they feel like it. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) [ The murder of expertise ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) Lisa Needham · Jun 11 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) But when it comes to AI, we’re going to “restore permissionless innovation.” The report proposes to give lucky ducky innovators a pile of cash up front for grants lasting five years or longer, saying “awards should be fully-funded in year one, with all resources earmarked upfront, to minimize administrative burdens and reduce pressure for researchers to generate intermediate results to secure continued funding.” Yeah, wouldn’t want to have to make the Very Special Tech Bros show results or get money parceled out year by year like the plebes at universities. The report also proposes that we should have “fast grants” with “simplified applications requiring just a few pages of writing” because that is definitely how science works, just writing a bit off the dome and getting some cash. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) [ Tech elites are turning AI into ChatGPTrump ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Paul Waldman · July 29, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Oh, and we should have prizes and challenges, where multiple teams compete. The proposed prizes include incentives like “advance procurement commitments,” which means the federal government agrees to buy whatever is being developed. There’s also “regulatory fast-tracking,” making sure all those great AI thingies don’t have to wait too long to be unleashed on a market. These aren’t incentives to do science. These are incentives to develop things with tax dollars that you can then sell to the government for more tax dollars. In the suggestion that might be the most unhinged, the most very opposite of how both government and research work, our new age will include “golden tickets.” That’s where an individual reviewer in an agency — yes, just one person — can “recommend unconventional proposals that may not pass consensus-driven review panels” because somehow this will “surface valuable ideas too divisive for committees and attract higher quality reviewers by empowering them to exercise independent scientific judgment.” Yes, that’s saying that a random person in an agency should be able to shovel money at some idea even if it can’t pass a review panel, and that the opportunity to do so will attract better employees because apparently all the best minds in science are chomping at the bit to be allowed to unilaterally fund AI research based on their personal vibes. But that isn’t at all how actual science works, and actual scientists aren’t unhappy about review panels. They work collaboratively, not siloed in some secret race to create the next AI chatbot. A 2020 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research examined whether peer review panels succeed in helping agencies predict which research ideas will best advance science. Peer review was better at finding “diamond in the rough” applicants than a single government program official. How about that. Trump always wants a taste It’s painfully clear that what Katsios is trying to do here is turn the whole of government science research and funding into the sort of “move fast and break things” paradigm that is the hallmark of big tech. That method works to line the pockets of tech executives, but it isn’t science. There’s a reason the government funds different kinds of research than private tech companies do. What Katsios either fails to understand or deliberately ignores is that the federal government is the main funder of basic research precisely because it can take a long time for it to bear fruit and is not intended to be profitable as such. “Basic” here does not mean rudimentary or simple, but rather research that is designed to advance scientific knowledge instead of achieving a specific outcome or product. Big tech companies don’t widely fund that sort of research, because it doesn’t make them money. Industry dollars account for only about 20 percent of basic research funding, while the government contributes around 60 percent. Big tech companies and startups do, however, rely on and benefit from that basic research. A 2019 study found that 35 percent of all patents obtained by venture-backed startups from 1976 to 2016 cited federally supported research. Basic research funded by the NIH contributed to every single drug the FDA approved from 2010 to 2016. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) [ The Saudi nuclear farce and governance by whim and meme ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Noah Berlatsky · Jul 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Unlike inventing the next ChatGPT, actual science is slow and iterative. Government funding of research that, on its face, would not appear to lead to any big new invention is actually what underpins those big new inventions. If the government hadn’t funded research into desert lizard venom, we wouldn’t know about semaglutide, and we wouldn’t have Ozempic. If research scientists hadn’t studied how bees optimize nectar foraging within a colony, we wouldn’t have the algorithm that assigns internet traffic across computer servers. The report assiduously ignores that a symbiotic, profitable relationship between the federal government, universities, and private companies already exists. Each federal research dollar generates about $1.50 to $3.00 in long-term economic benefits. The $36 billion the government awarded in NIH research funding in fiscal year 2025 generated $94 billion in new economic activity. Trump’s proposed new golden age is intended to strip those billions from universities, resulting in the dismantling of departments and the shuttering of labs. But Katsios has a plan for that: Universities should just become trade schools to churn out no-show STEM degrees! “Require universities and community colleges to embed practical technical training and externships into STEM curricula. Let hands-on experience and industry credentials count toward degrees.” It’s quite the feat to, on the one hand, strip schools of funding for scientific research while simultaneously demanding to control what is taught and, oh, also, colleges need to give degrees to employees at big tech companies just for being employees at big tech companies. The new golden age would also exacerbate the brain drain Trump’s policies have already caused. Nature found that in the first quarter of 2025, US scientists submitted 32 percent more job applications abroad than in 2024. A March 2025 poll by Nature of roughly 1,600 scientists found that over 1,200 said they were considering leaving the country. Europe is investing $565 million to make it a “magnet for researchers” and provide funding for scientists who relocate. The new golden age is also about embedding Trump’s xenophobia into the fabric of American science. The report complains of an “over-reliance on foreign students” that “creates a security challenge our institutions are ill-equipped to address” and that a “reliance on foreign talent sidelines American students.” This is, to put it mildly, nonsense. International students pay far higher tuition and often receive no financial aid. Their tuition dollars are what make it possible for American students to get financial aid. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Those 1.1 million international students accounted for only six percent of the total number of students in higher education that year, but were such an economic engine that for every three international students, one job was created or supported. It’s impossible not to wonder whether part of Trump’s loathing for universities and their leading role in scientific research is that there is no way for him to corrupt the process and make money off it in the same way he can by giving millions and billions to Silicon Valley types who, in turn, give him millions in cash. There’s no way for his children to invest in universities that the government then gives no-bid contracts to, fattening the family’s bottom line, which is pretty much the Trump sons’ current venture capital practice. Trump and Katsios’s view of science is narrow, cramped, and wrong. We’re not in a crisis, we’re not a failed state. We’ve been a science superpower for decades, and the only thing that threatens that is Donald Trump. Tech bros are already living high off the hog in this administration. They don’t need any more of our tax dollars. Hopefully this new golden age never comes to pass. Thanks for reading Public Notice. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription. 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 Thanks for reading, and for your support.
The US ‘golden age’ science strategy: what Europeans need to know
The US has unveiled what officials claim is the most radical overhaul of the public R&D system in a generation, which if implemented could have significant implications for transatlantic research collaboration. Science: A New Golden Age derides universities as “legacy institutions” and instead wants to prioritise funding on technological challenges, new research labs and funding that follows individual scientists, rather than being linked to their institutions. “Too much of our research enterprise has come to serve itself rather than the scientists within it,” writes Michael Kratsios, director of the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the only named author of the report. “Federal funding agencies should support a broader range of performers.” But some critics argue that the strategy is a smokescreen, using genuine problems in academia as an excuse to further weaken US universities, which US vice-president JD Vance has labelled “the enemy..”Even as it talks of a “golden age” for science, the White House has proposed halving the 2027 budget of the US National Science Foundation (NSF), and has put forward double-digit cuts for other funding bodies, such as the National Institutes for Health. It asked for similarly steep savings in 2026, but Congress stopped them going through. Science: A New Golden Age says success will be measured by the extent to which scientists are “free” to pursue the most “vital questions,,” painting academia as currently hidebound by bureaucracy, sluggishness and consensual conservatism. And yet the Trump administration is simultaneously planning new rules that will hand political appointees unprecedented powers to screen and cancel grants. The report has pretentions to be the successor to Science: The Endless Frontier, the seminal 1945 document in which presidential science advisor Vannevar Bush set out the case for post-war government funding of basic research, helping to spur the creation of funders such as the NSF. Even the title page font is the same. But it remains unclear if the latest report will leave anything like as lasting a legacy.Here, Science|Business explains some of the biggest proposed changes in Science: A New Golden Age, and how Europeans think it might change the landscape of their biggest science partner.Universities under fireA key target of the report are US universities, which it repeatedly suggests are outmoded as research institutions. It criticises the NSF for channelling resources “overwhelmingly to a single type of performer, the university-based, principal investigator-led research group..” Universities “extract” money from researchers’ grants to support “growing administrative bloat,” alongside legitimate uses. The Trump administration has been trying to cut the overhead costs in federal research grants that flow to universities. Instead, new institutions are being built. In May, the NSF announced it would spend $1.5 billion on two new so-called X-Labs, focused on scientific instrumentation and quantum systems. The idea is that they fill a niche in the landscape, tackling problems that are too big for a university lab, but too early stage for private start-up funding. Parallel with Europe?This shift to new research organisations parallels moves in Europe to set up new innovation agencies, such as Germany’s Sprind, the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency, and the EU’s European Innovation Council. The Dutch and French governments are looking to set up their own entities too. There’s now an emerging consensus, evident in a number of new strategies, that public R&D needs to be shaken up, Charles McIvor, an economist at the OECD, has written in response to Kratsios’s plans. “What stands out for me across these strategies [in the US, Germany, South Korea and Japan] is that governments are realising that the old ways of delivering STI [science, technology and innovation] programming no longer works,” he said in a LinkedIn post. Metascience wins?The document is, at least on the face of it, also a big win for some policy thinkers in the US who want far more experimentation with new forms of research grant and institution.It name-checks a litany of new public R&D ideas, from focused research organisations and advance market commitments to “golden tickets,” which allow grant reviewers the power to hand applicants money without requiring the consensus of other review panellists.Related articlesEuropean researchers sound the alarm that Trump rule changes will hit cooperationFocused research organisations: what are they, and how do you set them up? NIH turmoil risks reciprocal EU-US access to health research funding In addition, every federal research funding agency should set up a metascience unit, the strategy says, “with authority to run controlled experiments on review and funding mechanisms.” The UK has already set one up, the strategy points out. This mirrors recommendations to the European Commission. In 2024, a report led by former Portuguese science minister Manuel Heitor also advised the EU to set up an “experimental unit” to test out new methods of funding research. So far, however, Brussels hasn’t put forward any plans to do so. Bypass universitiesBut there’s a worry that the Trump administration is using the metascience movement to justify an overhaul of public R&D that punishes universities, which it sees as centres of political resistance. Last year, it threatened to cut Harvard University’s federal funding unless it hired and admitted a “critical mass” of new faculty and students to create “viewpoint diversity” across campus. It’s also attempted to strip academics of funding for working on politically forbidden areas, like LGBTIQ people’s health.The new strategy appears to be a “move to bypass the power of universities full stop and allow funders and political bureaucracies to handpick the projects and people who will execute them,” said Jean-Claude Burgelman, a former senior official in the Commission’s research directorate, on LinkedIn.The EU’s science counsellor in Washington, Florent Bernard, wrote that the plans risk diverting public research funding so that it “solely serves private interests.” “Who, if not independent universities, will do research that demonstrates the impact of tobacco on lung cancer or the role of human activities in our current climate crisis?” he wrote.Should we take it seriously?“I would view the overall document as a bad faith argument,” said Cole Donovan, director of science policy at the campaigning group Stand Up for Science, and a former OSTP official. “I don’t see the project itself as something that can be isolated from the broader attack on the system.” He thinks the argument that academia has become dysfunctional and in need of radical reform is being deployed as part of a “PR argument” to legitimate moves against US scientists. The strategy presents ideas like metascience units as new, whereas there were moves to set them up at the NSF during the previous administration of Joe Biden, Donovan said. The other caveat here is that the OSTP has limited power to carry out any of these recommendations. While Kratsios has issued a memo to research agencies telling them to implement the recommendations in the report, he doesn’t have direct budgetary control. “As a former OSTPer myself, this does not seem like a document that is realistic,” said Donovan.
Scientists found evolution repeating itself in the Galápagos Islands
More than 150 years after Darwin’s finches helped reshape biology, Galápagos plants are exposing another evolutionary surprise. Giant daisies repeatedly developed similar heat-tolerant leaf shapes, but each lineage used a different combination of genes. Researchers also found major genetic differences among isolated populations, suggesting new species may be forming right now.
The Vampire Squid Discovery That Science Had to Correct
For decades, the vampire squid stood alone as the last survivor of an ancient cephalopod order, until a strange specimen hauled from the deep South China Sea changed everything. Or so scientists thoug...
Why are biomedical scientists being vilified?
Protect those scientists who provide the underlying research that can continue furthering progress toward lifesaving preventions and treatments
Scientists say this is the reason some relationships flourish and others flop
How attachment styles influence our interactions with others — and how to change them.
Retaining Neurodivergent Talent Will Strengthen the STEM Pipeline
Learn how neuroinclusive management, training, and improving workplace culture can help retain neurodivergent talent and strengthen the STEM pipeline.
Reincarnation: What Science Says and Doesn’t (or Can’t) Say
Inside a University of Virginia lab, scientists have spent nearly six decades gathering unsettling evidence: children who recall violent deaths, bear matching birthmarks, and know facts they never could have learned. A grieving skeptic investigates whether reincarnation might just be real.
Animal spillover? Lab leak? What the science says about the origins of COVID-19
The release of Dr. Anthony Fauci's pandemic diaries has rekindled the debate over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Here's how scientists have weighed in.
Animal spillover? Lab leak? What the science says about the origins of COVID-19
The release of Dr. Anthony Fauci's pandemic diaries has rekindled the debate over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Here's how scientists have weighed in.
NSF testing new Ph.D. model giving trainees academic and industry experience
Young life scientists have been increasingly abandoning academia, a seismic shift that has fueled calls for rethinking graduate education. On Wednesday,
A mechanically tunable molecular switch for circularly polarized light emission
Over the past few decades, scientists have become increasingly interested in developing materials that do not simply withstand mechanical forces but instead respond to them in useful, detectable ways. ...
Scientists Discovered ‘Zombies’ With ‘Immortal’ Body Parts. This Could Redefine What We Think Life Is.
A “gray zone” form of living could help scientists answer long-held questions about regeneration, aging, and how tissues survive under tough conditions.
The Trump administration could shut US scientists out of the next Nobel-worthy discovery
The new proposal would restrict international collaboration and give political appointees the ability to decide the most important research to fund, and the power to pull the plug at any time, for any reason.
Climate extremes are becoming more extreme, worrying scientists
Heat, sea level rise, polar melting: They’re all picking up pace.
Biological 'superspreader' event could be imminent as more than 1,000 ships idle in the Strait of Hormuz, scientists warn
The prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz may pose significant biosecurity hazards as well as economic impacts, with potentially devastating consequences for global ecosystems and human health.
Weaving WEBS of Science at Wilkes
It may be summer break, but more than 100 someday scientists spent a week living the lab life at the We’re Empowered by Science camp on Wilkes University’s campus. The camp, better known by its...
'Completely Transformed My Understanding': Scientists Uncover Hundreds of Hidden Structures Beneath The Amazon
A society of millions.
Protect science & innovation from political interference
Scientific research is already facing setbacks as this administration tries to gain leverage over independent scientists. Now, President Donald Trump and his allies have proposed a rule to put their political appointees in charge of federal grant funding. This weaponization of research funding will slow down or stop research we depend on. Tell your senators to stop this proposed rule now!
Scientists Just Watched the Deep Ocean Floor Tear Itself Apart in Real Time
A new deep-sea probe witnessed the silent, violent magma flows that heal our planet’s scars.
Dr. Anthony Fauci pleads the Fifth to avoid Senate questions about Covid pandemic
Dr. Anthony Fauci, who led the US government response to the Covid-19 pandemic, invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, refusing to testify Wednesday just minutes into a Capitol Hill hearing that Republicans outwardly hoped would undermine the scientist and open him to claims of perjury.
What is a p‑value? Expert explains the most misunderstood number in science
If you've ever tried to read a scientific paper, you've almost certainly run into a p-value. And if you found it confusing, you're in good company: Plenty of working scientists misunderstand it too.
Scientists find a simple way to stop cavities without drilling
A liquid brushed onto cavities in seconds may spare many young children from pain, infection, and surgery. A major U.S. trial found that silver diamine fluoride stopped decay in more than half of treated baby teeth. The treatment requires no drilling, shots, or sedation, although it does permanently darken the decayed area.
What's the Antidote to Political Polarization?
As the United States commemorates 250 years of independence in 2026, the landmark event has arrived during a time of increased political polarization. According to a recent Pew Research Center study, 69% of Americans are dissatisfied with how things are going in the U.S., and 59% believe the country’s best days are behind it. Yet a majority (68%) still feel hopeful about the nation’s future. Bestselling author, social scientist, and Vanderbilt University professor Dr. Arthur Brooks shares that optimism—in part because he sees a clear path out of the divisiveness.
Fauci to face Republican questions over Covid pandemic origins
Veteran medical adviser likely to face questions over disputed ‘lab leak’ theory in investigation seen by scientists as ‘vilification and harassment’ of 85-year-old
Scientists look to shark DNA for the genetic signature of time
Aging leaves telltale marks on DNA, and for the first time, scientists have used those molecular signatures to create a model that predicts the age of sharks.
The Science Behind the AI Panic Is Shakier Than You Think
A column by Sascha Lobo Is AI making us dumb? So asked DER SPIEGEL on its cover a while ago. After a few weeks of recovery and a therapeutic intervention with the help of my AI, I feel able to respond. That’s a bit unfair, of course; the article itself is more nuanced than the loud cover, the image of a schoolkid with dull prompt questions, or the subtitle: “AI is conquering the schools, and educators fear a disaster.” The short answer to “Is AI making us dumb?” is: no. The long answer is more interesting, and even carries a preliminary glimmer of the spectacular. Unfortunately, it requires a detour into the sphere of artificial intelligence, into the mogul-field terrain of technology assessment, the attention economy, and the destructive virus of cultural pessimism. Along with narrowing the scope to AI’s effects on education and work rather than on intelligence. Because the honest version of the question would be: Does AI help us learn and work, or not? Generative AI, which set off the still-ongoing hype with ChatGPT, has only existed in relevant distribution since late 2022, early 2023. For a technology-driven transformation of people and society, that is extremely short. For that reason alone, research is still in its infancy. And technology assessment is not a fast discipline anyway. Prominent voices from Elizabeth Eisenstein to RAND to Tom Wheeler say we still cannot conclusively judge the consequences of the printing press. Its invention is a mere 580 years back, and some scholars would rather not circulate assessments that might have to be retracted in two or three hundred years. We’re Going Through Growing Pains A phenomenon that already caused upheaval in social media research makes serious assessment of AI’s consequences even harder: the “moving target” problem of LLM-ology, as the linguist Sean Trott called it in 2025. AI develops so quickly and so unpredictably that researchers often end up studying snapshots of the past. There are concepts, from morphological analysis to anticipatory governance, for keeping research, planning, and regulation halfway meaningful anyway. But even with those, universally valid statements are rare. DER SPIEGEL - The German View is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe We should therefore treat findings about the interplay between humans and AI as far more procedural and situational. Unfortunately, this challenge comes at the worst possible time. We are going through growing pains: AI’s everyday impact has grown very large very fast, and with it the longing for guidance. Annoyingly, the body of solid knowledge has not exploded along with it. Experts cannot be moved to broad consensus on even banal statements about AI. Sascha Lobo, born in 1975, is an author and strategy consultant focusing on the internet and digital technologies. Together with Jule Lobo, he explores the debates of the day in the podcast “Feel the News – Was Deutschland bewegt” (”What Moves Germany”). Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says software developers are dying out. Bill Gates considers coders one of only three professions that will survive the AI tsunami. Top tech economists find virtually irrefutable arguments both for and against an AI bubble. The same naturally applies to the structurally youth-hostile debate over whether AI is good or bad for young people. The gap between the demand for insight and the supply of solid knowledge creates an orientation vacuum. This vacuum of AI cluelessness is filled, as the attention economy described by Georg Franck in 1998 would have it, with half-knowledge (funnily enough, often AI-generated), marketing, and self-marketing. After all, infinite money is at stake, along with academia’s best current shot at global fame. But this iridescent froth of interpretation operates more by the algorithmic principles of the digital public sphere than by seriously earned insight. That is why dramatized, fear-feeding claims about AI are so promising. It tempts parts of academia into distorted drivel, and parts of the media then sensationalize the published drivel once more. Was the Research Aimed at a Desired Result? How badly this can influence academia and public perception is demonstrated by one of the most-discussed studies on AI’s effects: “Your Brain on ChatGPT.” The MIT study by Nataliya Kosmyna also gets plenty of space in the SPIEGEL cover story. What was measured and interpreted: lower brain activity in people who write with AI assistance, compared to people who only google or write without any tools. As is common with preprints, the study has not yet been peer-reviewed, and it contains substantial weaknesses that experts have sharply criticized. The first round had 54 participants in three groups, the second only 18, who reportedly also came from MIT’s own orbit. There was no preregistration (committing in advance to what you want to find out with which data). In their analysis, Stanković et al. even discovered an opposite effect that the study does not further explain. Some measurement data has not (yet) been published. And the EEG analysis method used is considered too imprecise to support such far-reaching conclusions. The biggest criticism, though, is the suspicion of an activism-driven study. In an interview with Time, lead author Kosmyna said she published the study immediately, rather than after full peer review, because she feared politicians might otherwise decide to put ChatGPT in kindergartens. She considers that absolutely harmful. It is legitimate to hold such a view. It just seems unscientific to approach a study with it, and then to design the setup so that the chance of a fitting desired result remains as high as possible. Ideologies Collide It is not easy to separate genuine AI insights from studies that trivialize and weaken well-founded AI criticism. The same goes for the opposing, AI-enthusiastic narratives, because the pro-AI side works against it with billions in resources. Ideologies collide, fed by egos, PR strategies, moral posturing, and once-in-a-lifetime opportunities. Doomsday marketing makes the search even harder: AI companies can profit from warnings about the dangers of AI, whether through the notoriety of apocalypse narratives or because, in some target groups, danger translates into power. Some seemingly negative findings are therefore quite welcome in the AI industry. If you try to get at the findings presumably less influenced by interest groups, the picture in education seems relatively clear: AI can improve educational outcomes when the right AI is used the right way, namely pedagogically. Simply dumping an AI chatbot into a classroom, by contrast, accomplishes little. Huge surprise. But something else is also obvious: whether they are allowed to or not, kids use AI for school, which is why the controlled integration of AI tools into education is, in the medium term, entirely without alternative. In the world of work, the landscape of findings is more complex and requires more differentiation. A series of serious studies points to an AI effect that suits neither the alarmists, regulation fetishists, and AI opponents, nor the trillion-dollar corporations with their armada of paid scientists, PR professionals, and ecosystems: working with AI helps the inexperienced (at least for now) considerably more than it helps the pros, in certain fields of work, and provided they know how to use it correctly. Missing Domain Knowledge Among the experienced, the professionals, and the high flyers, by contrast, despite frequent time savings, partially negative effects and new problems are emerging. Take the jagged frontier problem: AI solves task A brilliantly and fails completely at task B, even though both look similar even to professionals. Or the verification-cost problem, in which AI’s greater productivity gets eaten up by the enormous effort of checking its output. Or the illusion of competence, because AI makes new domains seem easily penetrable, until you painfully discover that deep domain knowledge is missing. Taken as a whole, the effects of working with AI do lean positive. But the promise that AI works as a turbocharger for everyone and boosts practically everything simply refuses to materialize. The AI magic the world has been feeling since ChatGPT arrived in late 2022 has so far barely shown up in most companies’ numbers. The consulting firm McKinsey has coined a term for this, the “gen AI paradox,” and believes that work processes and corporate structures would have to be rebuilt quite fundamentally to realize AI’s benefits at scale. Reuters just reported that only 3.3 percent of Microsoft’s customers have subscribed to the AI package Copilot. That may be down to the product; in other areas we continue to see soaring successes and new AI triumphs. But after the first quarter of 2026, disillusionment is the word for all too many AI projects at traditional companies: because the promised revolution of AI agents has so far failed to arrive or been postponed, and because of the leveling effect that many of the studies cited here suggest. Against Inequality The societal effects, on the other hand, appear rather encouraging. Many previous technologies operated on the Matthew principle, named for the Gospel verse about giving to those who already have: they tended to reward the more competent and more privileged. AI, however, seems more often to have an equalizing effect once a threshold of access and education is crossed. Some anecdotal insights point in this direction, for example, how an unemployed man in Leipzig successfully defended himself in court in 2025 against fraud accusations from Germany’s federal employment agency — without a lawyer, armed only with ChatGPT. The AI made mistakes and cited invented court rulings, but in the end the man walked away unpunished. And a key capability of artificial intelligence is its capacity to learn: set up correctly and fed with data, it can keep getting better. It is a question of time, or more precisely of AI innovations and training data, until even free AI chatbots write better legal briefs than law graduates with perfect exam scores. Whether that will make anyone dumb is something the world’s press will surely inform us of in due time. Subscribe Leave a comment
An honest look inside the "Science: A New Golden Age" report
Scientists are livid over the OSTP director's official report to the President. Will it lead to a new golden age for US science, or end it?
Scientists' biographies may demotivate, not inspire, children to study science
Currently popular biographies of famous scientists may demotivate—rather than inspire—children's desire to study or pursue careers in science, according to researchers who studied the messages in 422 ...
How brain cells restore healthy growth and connections after a disease-causing genetic deletion
Scientists at Virginia Tech's Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC have discovered how an experimental therapy can help brain cells overcome the effects of a disease-causing genetic deletion. Instead ...
Scientists may have found a clue to prevent muscles from aging, study hints
Scientists have identified a compound that may help preserve muscle in aging mice. Someday, this may help people with muscle atrophy.
Scientists Sound Alarm Over New Predator Threatening the Everglades Ecosystem - Futura-Sciences
A South American Arrival in the Florida Swamps Once exclusive territory of Florida’s native crocodiles and alligators, the wetlands now face a new—and unwelcome—resident. The spectacled caiman, with its distinctive bony ridge between its eyes (hence the “spectacled” nickname), can reach lengths of up to 8 feet. These reptiles, native...
Scientists’ biographies may demotivate, not inspire, children to study science
The themes in biographies about scientists may discourage some young readers from learning about science.
Visa time limits on foreign Ph.D. students and postdocs will harm U.S. science, experts warn
A Trump administration plan to limit visas for graduate student and postdocs to four years is fueling concerns that the U.S. could lose out on foreign scientists
Scientists look to shark DNA for the genetic signature of time
Aging leaves telltale marks on DNA, and for the first time, scientists have used those molecular signatures to create a model that predicts the age of sharks. This tool, known as an epigenetic clock, was developed for the zebra shark (Stegostoma tigrinum) and could soon be expanded to more species,
Climate Scientist Marco Tedesco Examines What Responsible AI Should Look Like
The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory researcher is helping launch an AI working group to explore how AI can support climate research without undermining ethics, equity or scientific judgment.
This value predicts future quality of life. In Australia, it’s tanking
More than 600 scientists are sounding the alarm that our standard of living is under threat.
Scientists Document Sharks Scraping Against Manta Rays. But What Does It Mean?
Sharks have been observed rubbing against manta rays and other large marine animals, likely as an alternative way to remove parasites when cleaner fish aren’t accessible.
Scientists repair damaged plastics at the molecular level, boosting recycling potential
Plastic recycling could become far more effective thanks to a new technique that restores the strength of damaged engineering plastics by repairing them at the molecular level.
VERITAS project could change the way scientists secure AI
VERITAS is an NSF-funded project bringing AI security to research infrastructure, screening models and data for hidden risks.
How Trump’s ‘America first’ administration could shut US scientists out of the next Nobel-worthy discovery
A proposed White House rule would give political appointees unprecedented control over scientific funding. One physicist, who helped discover the Higgs boson, explains how the rule would’ve stifled that breakthrough.
Scientists cut and rebuild molecules from the inside to create new chiral nanocarbons
Nanocarbons are molecular-scale carbon structures considered to be the building blocks for next-generation materials. Until now, scientists have built them by fusing small, flat carbon molecules together ...
'World models' are the future of AI, but how do they work?
Scientists are increasingly looking at building world models to get AI equipped to handle and interact with our physical reality.
An entirely new kind of drug will help us treat the untreatable
The first of a new generation of drugs that works in a completely different way to existing ones has been approved. Columnist Michael Le Page says this approach could transform treatments for all kinds of conditions
After World War II, a few snakes reached Guam; they now number up to 30,000 per square mile, and scientists found 19,000 hidden genetic changes
After World War II, a small number of brown tree snakes somehow made it to Guam, likely hidden in cargo, and the island has been dealing with the consequences ever since. Today, the snakes are so widespread that in some parts of the U.S.
Your Brain Really Can Learn to Multitask – And Scientists Just Revealed How
"This really is true multitasking."
Hidden charcoal reveals the true age of ancient cave paintings
A new analysis has precisely dated paintings in France’s Font-de-Gaume cave for the first time. Scientists discovered charcoal inside black pigments once thought to contain only minerals, allowing them to use radiocarbon dating. The results show that a bison was painted about 13,000 years ago, while sections of a mask-like figure were added during several widely separated periods.
Scientists create an “electron lighthouse” with laser light
Scientists have created an “electron lighthouse” that uses laser light to launch and steer electrons through a semiconductor without an applied electrical field. The quantum effect could eventually improve optical sensors, communications, imaging, and information storage.
Twisted laser light can tell mirror-image molecules apart
Scientists have created twisted laser beams that interact differently with right-handed and left-handed molecules, revealing their identity through the fragments they produce. The approach could provide a faster, simpler, and more sensitive way to analyze important molecules used in chemistry and pharmaceuticals.
How will Trump’s new science strategy change US research?
The White House recently released two documents that could disrupt which scientists, research groups, and projects the US government funds.
California Scientists Find Early Warning Sign of Irreversible Groundwater Damage
The U.S. Geological Survey’s California Water Center estimates 15% of the Central Valley’s groundwater storage capacity has been permanently lost because of subsidence.
The “Odyssey” reveals secrets of ancient science, mobile phones don�
The “Odyssey” reveals secrets of ancient science, mobile phones don't cause cancer, scientists find an exomoon
Biodegradable implant can deliver targeted cancer immunotherapy while protecting healthy tissue
Scientists at Houston Methodist Research Institute have developed a biodegradable implant designed to deliver cancer-fighting immunotherapy drugs directly into tumors over an extended period, a strategy ...
Scientists Discover The Fourth Transmissible Cancer Known To Science
Scientists found the fourth type of transmissible cancer, and the first in a fish: a melanoma whose tumor cells spread between catfish in a Vermont lake.
Peptides are the latest wellness trend – but do they work?
A drug advisory committee in the US has recommended approval for several experimental peptides. But there have been no large-scale tests of these new compounds in humans, finds columnist Grace Wade
Scientists pinpoint where cells first begin copying DNA
Researchers at the MRC Laboratory of Medical Sciences (LMS) and collaborators have uncovered one of the earliest steps in DNA replication: the moment a cell first opens its DNA to begin making a copy ...
At Blandy, Virginia kids ponder ‘what scientists look like’
Young students became environmental scientists this summer through a research camp at Blandy Experimental Farm.
UT Health San Antonio uncovers potential strategy for safer cancer treatments
Contact: Eileen Teves, 210-450-7239, tevese@uthscsa.edu Content provided by Claire Kowalick SAN ANTONIO, July 27, 2026 – Scientists at UT Health San Antonio, the academic health center of The University of Texas at San Antonio (UT San Antonio), have found a potential path to maintaining the cancer-fighting benefits of one type of immunotherapy while limiting harmful […]
Experts unveil the one country with the longest lifespan – but there's a surprising catch
Scientists calculated the lifespan of 204 countries and what they found was surprisingly consistent
Should We Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent?
More light at the day’s end comes at a price: much later winter sunrises across much of the U.S. Scientists have documented consequences for public health and the economy.
Should We Make Daylight Saving Time Permanent?
More light at the day’s end comes at a price: much later winter sunrises across much of the U.S. Scientists have documented consequences for public health and the economy.
Scientists reveal what sparkling water really does to your teeth
Unsweetened sparkling water may offer a tooth-friendlier alternative to sugary soda, according to a small preliminary study tracking how different drinks change mouth acidity. Soda caused the strongest and longest drop in salivary pH, while sparkling water produced only a temporary decline before saliva restored normal conditions. Importantly, acidity remained above the level associated with enamel damage.
Jodrell Bank Observatory facing closure after major funder cuts support
Scientists say decision is blow to UK astronomy as deep space observatory is home to world-leading facilities
Clemson scientists launch international food security partnership during visit to Nigeria
The partnership will expand research collaboration, graduate education and international engagement between Clemson University and IITA in Africa.
Scientists decipher how T cells sense enemies—such as cancer—at point of contact
Every encounter between a T cell and a potential target—especially when that target is a developing tumor—begins with a rapid series of molecular decisions. Within seconds, the immune cell must determine ...
As El Niño cooks Pacific, Calif. scientists warn ocean losing oxygen
A new study offers one solution.
How Trump’s “America First” Administration Could Shut U.S. Scientists Out of the Next Nobel-Worthy Discovery
A proposed White House rule would give political appointees unprecedented control over scientific funding. One physicist, who helped discover the Higgs boson, explains how the rule would’ve stifled that breakthrough.
Commentary: Heat waves show climate change is here
A few weeks ago, my daughter and I went to Paris to visit family and celebrate her high school graduation. As a marine scientist working on the front lines of
Scientists have found an Earth-like exoplanet
The super-Earth likely contains an atmosphere
How ultra-processed foods may damage your long-term brain health
An increasing number of studies have linked ultra-processed foods with depression, anxiety and even dementia. Columnist Helen Thomson explores how strong the evidence is for the brain effects of a diet full of these foods
Congo Ebola death toll tops 1,400 as vaccine trials start
DR Congo's Ebola outbreak has continued to grow, with confirmed infections reaching 3,200 and a fatality rate of nearly one in two. Scientists are racing to test the first vaccines against the rare Bundibugyo strain.
Chinese scientists turn to bamboo to strengthen the Great Green Wall
Why scientists watched grass grow in Harpenden for 170 years
Started by Victorians, Rothamsted Research are monitoring how grass grows.
Scientists Found a Genius Way to Remove 'Forever Chemicals' From Soil
It's a really, really big mess we've made.
Scientists Just Discovered A Contagious Cancer In A Catfish, The Fourth Known To Science. Meet The Other Three
Only four transmissible cancers are known, contagious cell lineages that spread between animals. Meet the dog, devil and shellfish cancers behind the catfish.
A planetarium for the brain
Neuroscientists should take a cue from astrophysicists and use planetariums to inspire awe, argues Tyler Sloan. His new film takes a first step.