SpaceX Delays Crewed Launch to ISS Shortly Before Liftoff
A Falcon 9 rocket topped with a Dragon capsule is now slated to try again as early as 11:43 a.m. local time on Friday from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
20 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
How Rich Countries Can Build Nuclear Power Cheaply Again
Electricity demand is booming, and it's not just because of artificial intelligence. So much so that many are ready to revisit the idea of nuclear power. Microsoft signed a $16 billion deal to reopen the Three Mile Island nuclear plant to power their data centres for the next 20 years. But developed countries haven't built more than a handful of new reactors in decades. When they have tried, the cost of those nuclear plants and the time to build them has been extraordinary. Will this renewed interest yield different results?
Associated Press
20 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,' the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost,' Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. 'It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day.' John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard,' she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
CNN
41 minutes ago
- CNN
What you should know about metabolism, according to a nutrition scientist
Food & healthFacebookTweetLink Follow EDITOR'S NOTE: The podcast Chasing Life With Dr. Sanjay Gupta explores the medical science behind some of life's mysteries big and small. You can listen to episodes here. (CNN)— Think speeding up your metabolism is key to losing weight? Metabolism has grown into one of the biggest buzzwords in the wellness industry — a tricky code that, if deciphered, is believed to unlock the secrets of weight loss and overall health. Despite the term's ubiquity, one scientist says many people don't understand much of how this basic bodily process works. 'They think it has something to do with how much food we can eat without gaining weight or something like that,' Dr. Kevin Hall told CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta recently on his podcast, Chasing Life. Hall wants to elevate metabolism for different reasons. 'Metabolism is just this incredible biochemical process that basically turns the food that we eat and the oxygen that we breathe into essentially … everything we are and everything we do,' he said. A leading nutrition and metabolism scientist, Hall is well-known for his research on contestants from the reality show 'The Biggest Loser' that helped explain what set participants who kept the weight off apart from those who gained it back. He spent more than two decades at the National Institutes of Health. His later work on ultraprocessed foods investigated its link to obesity, including one study that demonstrated it actively caused participants to overeat. Hall announced his early retirement and exit from NIH in April, citing censorship of how his research findings were communicated. He's now coauthor of the new book 'Food Intelligence: The Science of How Food Both Nourishes and Harms Us' alongside journalist Julia Belluz. Metabolism and weight loss enter conversations arm in arm, but this, according to Hall, can be reductive. 'I just find it incredibly frustrating sometimes that this idea of metabolism, this really beautiful physiological process that is so fundamental to life, is kind of talked about as, 'Oh well, if you take this supplement, you can boost your metabolism and lose weight,'' he explained to Gupta. You can listen to the full episode here. Is a faster or higher metabolism really the highway to weight loss? Hall is here to set the record straight, highlighting three misconceptions about metabolism that show there is more to it than meets the eye. One common belief is that a slower metabolism results in a higher body weight. But mostly, Hall said, the opposite is true. 'Generally, larger people have faster metabolisms than smaller people,' he told Gupta. Hall attributed the pervasiveness of this myth to the way researchers designed early metabolism studies. Scientists initially tried to match up participants' caloric intake to their weight, but they didn't account for the fact that these calorie counts were self-reported. It turned out that those with obesity often underreported the number of calories they ate to a larger degree than their leaner counterparts. This, Hall said, 'led people to a conclusion that, well, if they're eating less calories and they're maintaining their weight, then they must be burning less calories. And maybe the reason why they have obesity is because they have slow metabolisms.' Modern technology now allows researchers to rely on data, not participants' own reports. 'When we actually directly measure people's metabolisms, people with obesity have higher metabolic rates on average than people who are lean,' Hall noted. But the myth that we should be boosting metabolism to treat obesity has stubbornly persisted — and has at times led to deadly consequences. When Stanford University researchers discovered that the chemical compound 2,4-dinitrophenol, or DNP, increased metabolism levels in the 1930s, they enthusiastically promoted it as a safe and effective tool for treating obesity. While DNP did boost metabolism, it also led to side effects that included blindness and death, causing federal drug regulators to quickly withdraw it from the market. 'Maybe,' Hall suggested, 'it shouldn't be too much of a surprise later to realize that with something so fundamentally important to life as metabolism, you can't just turn it up and turn it down with a pharmaceutical drug and not expect some pretty severe side effects, including death.' Like weight, age might not affect metabolism as much as you may assume. 'It turns out that until you get to very advanced ages, we're talking 70s and 80s, it looks like our metabolic rate is roughly constant,' Hall said. There are, of course, changes in the aging body that can impact metabolic rates. People 'past the age of 30 or so,' Hall said, are 'tending to lose muscle mass or tending to lose lean mass, and they're tending to gain fat mass. And that alone is anticipated to result in a lower metabolism.' That's because lean muscle burns more calories than fat. But it's these age-related changes — that are not inevitable — and not age itself, that influence one's metabolism. 'Once you get rid of that effect … it doesn't seem like there's a fundamental aging effect to slow metabolism as, as we get older,' Hall concluded. A couple ways to combat the loss of lean muscle mass as you age is by engaging in twice-a-week strength training and getting enough protein in your diet (but no need to go overboard). Another pillar of metabolism mythology is the idea that a slow metabolism is the enemy of continued weight loss. Interventions such as dieting are believed to slow metabolism to the point that you can't lose any additional weight. But keeping your metabolism from slowing down isn't the key to sustained weight loss, Hall said. In fact, it's just the opposite. 'The people who are most successful at losing weight and keeping it off are the ones who sport the slowest metabolisms or the greatest reductions in metabolism,' he said. 'It's kind of like stretching a spring, right?' The more intensely someone diets or exercises, the more weight they'll lose and the more their metabolism will slow down, he explained in his book. Hall's research showed that a slower metabolism 'didn't seem to determine anyone's ability to lose weight or keep it off in the short or long run.' By uncoupling metabolism from the weight loss conversation, Hall said he hopes everyone can appreciate the phenomenon for what it really is. Misinformation about metabolism 'has really distracted people, I think, from the real beauty of what this is,' he told Gupta. 'It's harnessing the continuous flow of matter and energy in our food and in our breath and powering every cell in our body, as well as the bodies and cells of practically every organism that we have ever encountered,' Hall said. 'It's a fundamental component of life, and it's just incredibly fascinating.' We hope these three insights help you understand your metabolism better. Listen to the full episode here. And join us next week for a new episode of Chasing Life.
