Ukraine gains access to EU's Copernicus space programme
Ukraine has gained almost complete access to the European Union's Copernicus Earth observation space programme, which provides satellite data for environmental monitoring, climate change and emergency management.
Source: Mezha Media, a technology and IT news platform within Ukrainska Pravda's holding company, citing the Ukrinform news agency
Details: The agreement on Ukraine's participation in components of the Copernicus programme, signed with the EU in Brussels as part of the EU-Ukraine Association Council, will grant Ukraine access to the space programme on equal terms with EU member states, except for specific security-related components.
The space agreement also includes Ukraine's association with several other components of the programme, such as Space Weather Events (SWE), which enables the monitoring and analysis of phenomena in the space environment that could impact satellites, energy systems and communications. Another component, Near-Earth Objects (NEO), focuses on tracking asteroids and other objects that pose a threat to Earth.
Ukrainian representatives will have the right to become observers in the committees responsible for decision-making on these programmes, although they will not have voting rights. This cooperation is expected to foster the development of space technologies in Ukraine. European Commissioner for Defence and Space, Andrius Kubilius, referred to the agreement as a "first step" towards Ukraine's full integration into EU space programmes.
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
‘Forever chemicals' exposure before birth raises the risk of high blood pressure in teenage years
'Forever chemicals' may be taking their toll on our health before we are even born, new research suggests. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a group of chemicals used in everyday products like food packaging and non-stick cookware. They're known as 'forever chemicals' because they don't degrade easily and can build up in the environment – and in our bodies. Scientists have detected PFAS in people's blood, breast milk, semen, livers, and even brains. They suspect these chemicals harm human health, with studies linking them to higher cholesterol, some cancers, and fertility problems, among other issues. The new research adds another complication to that list: high blood pressure during adolescence. Related Forever chemicals: Brussels' mission to clean up Europe's water The analysis followed more than 1,000 children in the US. It used maternal plasma collected shortly after they were born to identify their level of prenatal PFAS exposure, and matched it to doctors' records up until their 18th birthdays. Prenatal exposure to PFAS was linked to a higher risk of developing high blood pressure later in childhood, particularly in the teenage years, according to the study published in the Journal of the American Heart Association. The findings indicate that 'these forever chemicals can have long-lasting and potentially harmful effects that may only become apparent years after birth,' Zeyu Li, the study's lead author and a researcher at Johns Hopkins University in the US, said in a statement. The risk of elevated blood pressure was even higher for boys and Black children with higher PFAS levels at birth, the study found. Related How 'dangerous chemicals' detected in products in the EU could be impacting your health In a surprise to researchers, a handful of forever chemicals were actually linked to lower diastolic, or bottom number, blood pressure in early childhood, though that changed when they entered their teenage years. Evidence on the health effects of PFAS has been mixed so far. While researchers believe these chemicals pose risks, it's difficult to pinpoint their exact impact because there are thousands of PFAS that could all interact in different ways, and because people's exposure changes over time. Even so, Li said the latest study underscores the need for researchers to track people's health and their PFAS levels over a long period of time, from early childhood to adolescence and beyond. Related How to avoid 'forever chemicals': 5 items you should stop using to minimise exposure to PFAS Meanwhile, Mingyu Zhang, the study's senior author and an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, said stronger environmental protections are needed to protect people from PFAS, given they are so ubiquitous that people cannot meaningfully limit their exposure on their own. That could include phasing out forever chemicals from consumer products and in industrial settings, he said, as well as better surveillance and limits on PFAS in water systems. 'This is not something individuals can solve on their own,' Zhang said.
Medscape
3 days ago
- Medscape
Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy Improves Survival in Lung Cancer
Adding nivolumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved 5-year overall survival among patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to findings from a phase 3 trial presented at the recent American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2025 annual meeting. The survival benefit was more pronounced in patients who achieved a pathologic complete response or a presurgery clearance of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). METHODOLOGY: The phase 3 CheckMate 816 trial has shown that compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, nivolumab plus chemotherapy improvespathologic complete response rates and event-free survival in patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC. Based on these findings, this regimen was approved for this patient population in the US, EU, and other places. compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, nivolumab plus chemotherapy improvespathologic complete response rates and event-free survival in patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC. Based on these findings, this regimen was approved for this patient population in the US, EU, and other places. Researchers are now reporting the final, prespecified analysis of overall survival. In the trial, 358 patients with stage IB-IIIA resectable NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy or platinum-based chemotherapy alone every 3 weeks for three cycles. Surgery was performed within 6 weeks of completing neoadjuvant treatment. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both were permitted. Primary endpoints were event-free survival and pathologic complete response. Overall survival was the key secondary endpoint. The median follow-up duration was 68.4 months. TAKEAWAY: The 5-year overall survival rate was 65.4% with nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs 55.0% with chemotherapy alone. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy reduced the risk for death by 28% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; P = .048). = .048). Among patients who received the combination therapy, the 5-year overall survival rate was 95.3% for those who achieved a pathological complete response vs 55.7% for those who did not. Overall, 24% of patients in the nivolumab group achieved a pathological complete response vs only 2.2% in the chemotherapy group. ctDNA clearance before surgery was a strong prognostic indicator, regardless of treatment. At 5 years, overall survival was 75.0% among patients with ctDNA clearance vs 52.6% in those without (HR for death, 0.38 in the nivolumab group and 0.39 in the chemotherapy-only group). The combination therapy was associated with consistent survival benefits across disease stage and PDL-1 expression levels. The 5-year lung cancer-specific survival rate was 74.9% with nivolumab plus chemotherapy vs 65.1% with chemotherapy alone (HR, 0.65). No new safety concerns emerged, and there were no new deaths related to a trial treatment. IN PRACTICE: 'In this trial, we found that the use of neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone, along with long-term benefit regarding event-free survival,' the authors wrote. 'These findings support the hypothesis that neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy can have a profound impact on the course of a patient's life when paired with the curative potential of surgical resection.' SOURCE: This study, led by Patrick M. Forde, MB, BCh, PhD, Trinity St. James's Cancer Institute, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, was published online in The New England Journal of Medicine and presented at ASCO. LIMITATIONS: Although the overall survival with nivolumab plus chemotherapy achieved statistical significance, the margin was narrow. Additionally, several subgroups in the exploratory analyses were too small for adequate statistical comparison, requiring cautious interpretation of these results. Black patients were underrepresented, which may have affected the generalizability of the findings. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Five authors declared being employees of Bristol Myers Squibb, with some holding stock or stock options with the company. Several authors declared working as consultants or having other ties with various sources including Bristol Myers Squibb.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could ban states from regulating AI for a decade
President Donald Trump's massive bill package, dubbed the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' contains a proposal that could significantly waylay a burgeoning movement to regulate artificial intelligence on the state level. The ban is tucked into a section of the bill that would allocate $500 million over the next 10 years to modernize government systems with the help of AI and automation technologies. The ban would not only prevent new state-led regulations of AI but would also block dozens of states from enforcing preexisting AI regulations and oversight structures. The 1,000-plus-page legislation pushed forward by Republicans passed in the House by just one vote on May 22, sending it off to the Senate. Though Republicans hope to finalize the tax and policy bill by the end of July in order to avoid a debt default, it's still a ways off from becoming law, as the GOP navigates a slim majority amid party infighting over several key elements of the bill. Though misgivings center on Medicaid, tax cuts and government spending, a few high-profile Republican lawmakers have signaled the proposed AI regulation ban is also a point of friction. Trump's bill: Tax policy bill clears the House. Next up: An opinionated Senate Regulation of artificial intelligence is often likened to a wild west of sorts, as governments across the country and the globe race to keep up with the rapidly evolving technology. AI itself has proved to be an enticing tool for public and private organizations – so much so that adoption of the tech far outpaces many governments' ability to implement laws and frameworks meant to prevent misuse. As it stands, there is no centralized federal oversight of AI, leaving states to attempt to regulate the technology through an uneven patchwork of legislation. Under President Joe Biden's administration, the White House introduced a now-defunct blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, taking a cue from the European Union's similarly named document. It directed state agencies to evaluate current uses and potential impacts of AI, evaluate potential AI-fueled risks and encourage state employee training on the subject. In its place is a new Trump-led AI framework, prioritizing accelerating AI innovation. The Trump administration's stance on regulation so far largely aligns with that of companies and much of the tech industry, who argue that regulation would stymie innovation. Trump and AI: President signs executive order boosting AI in K-12 schools Many regulations target AI scams, deepfakes and AI-assisted disinformation, with increasing focus on other possible harms from the technology. While there are many opportunities for AI to create positive changes, policy and advocacy organizations like the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy (CITED) warn of the same possibilities for negative impacts, necessitating regulation in some areas. "Many commentators believe that AI could soon be used by state and non-state actors to develop dangerous weapons, increase surveillance, and magnify existing biases and discrimination in a variety of fields, from lending, to hiring, to policing," CITED says in a January 2024 report. The letter's signatories include Georgetown Law's Center on Privacy and Technology, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Actors' Equity Association, Innocence Project and the National Union of Healthcare Workers, among others. Though Republicans largely expressed support for the provision in a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday, May 21, prominent Republican Republican Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee have recently pushed back on the ban. 'We certainly know that in Tennessee, we need those protections,' Blackburn said in a May 21 hearing on a bill to protect Americans from AI impersonations. 'And until we pass something that is federally preemptive, we can't call for a moratorium.' Hawley also pushed back on the proposed ban in a May 13 interview with Business Insider. 'I would think that, just as a matter of federalism, we'd want states to be able to try out different regimes that they think will work for their state,' Hawley said. 'And I think in general, on AI, I do think we need some sensible oversight that will protect people's liberties.' The argument against regulation is often one of innovation, with tech industry leaders and companies saying it could limit the technology and make the U.S. less competitive in the field. Others in support of the ban, such as Sean Heather, Senior Vice President of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say states are moving too fast in regulating AI. "We should stop international patchworks and domestic patchworks in AI regulation," Heather said during the May 21 House subcommittee hearing. "We should not be in a rush to regulate. We need to get it right, therefore taking a time out to discuss it at a federal level is important to be able to support a moratorium." At least 45 states plus Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., introduced AI bills in the 2024 legislative session, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Of those, over 30 states and territories passed legislation concerning AI, with Utah, Maryland and Florida passing regulatory and AI oversight acts. Across seven states and Puerto Rico, there are 16 AI regulation bills introduced last year still pending legislative approval, and more than a dozen new regulatory proposals introduced in statehouses across the country in 2025. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' could ban states from AI regulation
