What people get wrong about metabolism—an interview with Herman Pontzer
Hosts: Alok Jha, The Economist 's science and technology editor. Contributor: Herman Pontzer, professor of evolutionary anthropology and global health at Duke University and the author of 'Burn' and 'Adaptable'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
31-07-2025
- The Guardian
White House freezes $108m in funds to Duke University over affirmative action
The Trump administration has frozen $108m in federal research funding to Duke University after the federal government announced this week that it was investigating allegations that the school engaged in racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action, according to a person familiar with the matter and media reports. The National Institutes of Health reportedly halted the funding to the private university in North Carolina, said the person who spoke to the Associated Press on Wednesday on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. CNN and ABC News also reported the funding freeze. The development came as, earlier this week, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education issued a joint letter to Duke, stating that it had been made aware of allegations of what it called racial preferences in Duke's 'hiring, student admissions, governance, patient care, and other operations'. Duke is the latest institution to have its federal funding held up as the government investigates allegations of antisemitism and policies that support greater diversity, equity and inclusion that the Trump administration alleges are unlawful. It follows other investigations by the administration into top-flight private universities, including the Ivy League's Harvard, Columbia and Cornell. Duke did not immediately comment on the reported funding freeze. In Monday's letter to Duke, the Trump administration states that it has been made aware of allegations that Duke University and Duke Health are engaged in practices that, 'if true, would violate Titles VI of the Civil Rights Act and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, and render Duke Health unfit for any further financial relationship with the federal government'. 'These practices allegedly include illegal and wrongful racial preferences and discriminatory activity in recruitment, student admissions, scholarships and financial aid, mentoring and enrichment programs, hiring, promotion, and more,' the letter from the government states. The letter does not provide any specific examples. 'Racism is a scourge when practiced by individuals, but it is especially corrosive when enshrined in the nation's most eminent and respected institutions,' the letter, signed by the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, and the education secretary, Linda McMahon, adds. The letter orders Duke to end any practices at its health system that give 'benefits or advantages' based on race. Saying Duke is unlikely to be capable of an 'honest and trustworthy review', the letter takes the unusual step of requesting a new merit and civil rights committee that would be approved by the government and authorized by the school's board of trustees. The panel would be tasked with identifying and ending any racial preferences. If problems remained after six months, the administration would pursue legal enforcement, the letter said. The education department separately opened an investigation into the Duke Law Journal on Monday over allegations that it gave advantages to prospective editors from underrepresented groups. The Trump administration has used federal research funding as leverage in its unprecedented effort to reshape universities that Trump has described as hotbeds of liberalism. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion It has presented a crisis for universities that rely on federal grants as a major source of revenue, spurring some to take on debt and find other ways to self-fund research. Duke University spent $1.5bn on research last year, with nearly 60% coming from federal sources, according to the university's website. Even before the latest funding freeze, Duke faced financial turmoil. Last week, university leaders said almost 600 employees had accepted voluntary buyouts but that layoffs would still be needed. Officials said they needed to reduce costs amid uncertainty around federal research funding and a hike to the university's federal endowment tax. The Trump administration has been ratcheting up pressure on universities in hopes of striking deals such as one that Columbia University signed last week. The Ivy League school agreed to pay a $200m settlement over three years to the federal government and make changes to admissions, hiring, student discipline and more in exchange for regaining access to federal funding, among other things. In exchange for Columbia's concessions, the White House will reinstate $400m in federal funding it had stripped from the university earlier this year over allegations that it allowed antisemitism to fester on campus. The Columbia deal was met with mixed reactions from students, faculty and alumni. The administration has described it as a template for other universities including Harvard, which has been in talks with the administration even as it battles the White House in court.
The Guardian
30-07-2025
- The Guardian
White House freezes $108m in funding to Duke University over allegations of racial discrimination
The Trump administration has frozen $108m in federal research funding to Duke University after the federal government announced this week that it was investigating allegations that the school engaged in racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action, according to a person familiar with the matter and media reports. The National Institutes of Health reportedly halted the funding to the private university in North Carolina, said the person who spoke to the Associated Press on Wednesday on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. CNN and ABC News also reported the funding freeze. The development came as, earlier this week, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education issued a joint letter to Duke, stating that it had been made aware of allegations of what it called racial preferences in Duke's 'hiring, student admissions, governance, patient care, and other operations'. Duke is the latest institution to have its federal funding held up as the government investigates allegations of antisemitism and policies that support greater diversity, equity and inclusion that the Trump administration alleges are unlawful. It follows other investigations by the administration into top-flight private universities, including the Ivy League's Harvard, Columbia and Cornell. Duke did not immediately comment on the reported funding freeze. In Monday's letter to Duke, the Trump administration states that it has been made aware of allegations that Duke University and Duke Health are engaged in practices that, 'if true, would violate Titles VI of the Civil Rights Act and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, and render Duke Health unfit for any further financial relationship with the federal government'. 'These practices allegedly include illegal and wrongful racial preferences and discriminatory activity in recruitment, student admissions, scholarships and financial aid, mentoring and enrichment programs, hiring, promotion, and more,' the letter from the government states. The letter does not provide any specific examples. 'Racism is a scourge when practiced by individuals, but it is especially corrosive when enshrined in the nation's most eminent and respected institutions,' the letter, signed by the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, and the education secretary, Linda McMahon, adds. The letter ordered Duke to end any practices at its health system that give 'benefits or advantages' based on race. Saying Duke is unlikely to be capable of an 'honest and trustworthy review', the letter takes the unusual step of requesting a new merit and civil rights committee that would be approved by the government and authorized by the school's board of trustees. The panel would be tasked with identifying and ending any racial preferences. If problems remained after six months, the administration would pursue legal enforcement, the letter said. The education department separately opened an investigation into the Duke Law Journal on Monday over allegations that it gave advantages to prospective editors from underrepresented groups. The Trump administration has used federal research funding as leverage in its unprecedented effort to reshape universities that Trump has described as hotbeds of liberalism. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion It has presented a crisis for universities that rely on federal grants as a major source of revenue, spurring some to take on debt and find other ways to self-fund research. Duke University spent $1.5bn on research last year, with nearly 60% coming from federal sources, according to the university's website. Even before the latest funding freeze, Duke faced financial turmoil. Last week, university leaders said almost 600 employees had accepted voluntary buyouts but that layoffs would still be needed. Officials said they needed to reduce costs amid uncertainty around federal research funding and a hike to the university's federal endowment tax. The Trump administration has been ratcheting up pressure on universities in hopes of striking deals such as one that Columbia University signed last week. The Ivy League school agreed to pay a $200m settlement over three years to the federal government and make changes to admissions, hiring, student discipline and more in exchange for regaining access to federal funding, among other things. In exchange for Columbia's concessions, the White House will reinstate $400m in federal funding it had stripped from the university earlier this year over allegations that it allowed antisemitism to fester on campus. The Columbia deal was met with mixed reactions from students, faculty and alumni. The administration has described it as a template for other universities including Harvard, which has been in talks with the administration even as it battles the White House in court.
Economist
25-07-2025
- Economist
Why armies are using laser weapons to zap things out of the sky
The Economist explains | Beam them down Your browser does not support this video. ARMIES HAVE dreamt of firing laser weapons for a long time. A lab funded by America's Defence Department demonstrated one in 1960. But decades of development failed to produce a practical weapon, and the ambition waned. Now it is back. Last year America reportedly used a high-energy laser (HEL) to down drones aimed at its forces in the Middle East. Israel and Russia have both recently used HELs to foil drone attacks. Ukraine may soon do the same. Why are laser weapons suddenly useful? And what role could they play in future wars? The Martians had a heat ray that could destroy the Royal Navy's battleships, but that was in 'The War of the Worlds', a 19th-century work of science fiction. HELs are not high-energy enough for that. To seriously damage a warship or tank would require megawatts of power–a noticeable proportion of the output of a conventional power plant. HELs produce kilowatts, ie, thousandths of a megawatt. Even aircraft can survive bombardment by HELs. For a while missiles looked like potential prey. They have thin skins and are packed with fuel and explosives. Merely damaging the shell of a supersonic missile can create drag, causing it to tumble out of control. And, no matter how fast the missile, laser beams, which travel at the speed of light, can catch up to it. President John F. Kennedy gave a laser-missile-defence project the highest national-security priority after the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. But missiles turned out to be difficult targets. They're not as fast as lasers, yet they are still hard to intercept. In 1973 a laser downed an aerial target at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, but it was something a little slower than a missile, perhaps a small radio-controlled aircraft. The advent of the small drone as a weapon in the 2010s has given lasers a target they can handle. The Russian and Ukrainian armed forces have launched attack drones, as have the Houthi militia in Yemen. They are becoming ubiquitous in war. Conventional air defences can shoot them down, but many of the missiles these systems fire cost millions of dollars and are in short supply. Lasers, on the other hand, cost just a few dollars per shot and their ammunition is limited only by their power supply. Advocates say they're the ideal drone killers. Your browser does not support this video. America fielded a laser system in the Persian Gulf in as early as 2014, to destroy small boats and other 'asymmetric threats', but did not use it. It probably first fired one in battle last year. A 20-kilowatt LOCUST system, the size of a small garden shed and weighing some 1,500kg, reportedly downed drones launched at a military base in the Middle East, probably by an Iran-backed militia. This year Israel released video of its lasers shooting down drones fired by Hizbullah, a Lebanon-based militia. The Israel Defence Forces claim that they have taken out 'dozens' of drones. Analysts believe that Israel is using the Keren Or (Lite Beam) system made by Rafael, an Israeli firm. It's a ten-kilowatt little brother to the 50-kilowatt Iron Beam system, which is being developed to supplement the conventional Iron Dome anti-missile system. Meanwhile, Russia has released a video purporting to show an HEL engaging a Ukrainian drone. The weapon looks identical to a Chinese-made Shen Nung, with an output of more than 30 kilowatts. Ukraine has also released footage of its 50-kilowatt Trident laser destroying drones in tests. Its commanders are eager to field Trident to defend against nightly waves of Iranian-designed Shahed drones fired from Russia. Though trendy, HELs have drawbacks. Even though one blast is cheap, installing a system is not. The British Royal Navy's Dragonfire HELs will cost £100m ($135m) apiece. Today's lasers have relatively short ranges (of up to a few miles) and can be hampered by smoke, dust, haze or fog. In theory they can be carried around by planes or Jeeps, but get the power they need more easily from ships or on the ground. Lasers also have competition in the form of old-fashioned anti-aircraft guns, which are relatively cheap and can take on lots of targets. Attack drones are here to stay. The question is whether beams or bullets will blast them.
