Creating calm? Backyard retreats lead home trends this year
Americans are striving for harmony at home more than ever — transforming the backyard into a sanctuary has been named the biggest outdoor trend for 2025. Conducted by Talker Research on behalf of Trex Company, a survey of 2,000 homeowners explored their home aspirations and goals for 2025 and found the most popular exterior home trends people are looking to implement this year are creating backyard sanctuaries (41%), adding fire pits and outdoor heating elements (38%) and making their spaces more private (37%). The results also showed a real sentiment for making the most of our outdoor spaces and increasing time in the fresh air — two-thirds (67%) plan on spending more time outdoors than in previous years. In fact, homeowners are estimating spending 11.7 hours per week outside at their homes this year compared to 9.6 hours per week spent outside last year — that's an increase of 22%.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
33 minutes ago
- The Hill
NIH scientists condemn Trump research cuts
Hundreds of staffers from across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are speaking out against the politicization of their research and termination of their work while demanding that the drastic changes made at the agency be walked back. In a letter addressed to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya, more than 2,000 signatories stated, 'we dissent to Administration policies that undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe.' The letter was titled 'The Bethesda Declaration' in reference to where NIH's campus is located. The signatories cited Bhattacharya's stated commitment to academic freedom that he made in April and called on him to push back against the changes Trump administration has implemented at NIH under his leadership. 'Academic freedom should not be applied selectively based on political ideology. To achieve political aims, NIH has targeted multiple universities with indiscriminate grant terminations, payment freezes for ongoing research, and blanket holds on awards regardless of the quality, progress, or impact of the science,' they wrote. They pointed to U.S. law and prior research that has shown that the participation of diverse populations in studies is necessary for NIH's work. The NIH staffers further blasted the canceling of nearly completed studies. 'Ending a $5 million research study when it is 80% complete does not save $1 million, it wastes $4 million,' they wrote. The researchers called on Bhattacharya to restore foreign collaborations with the global scientific community, put independent peer reviews back in place, bring back terminated NIH staffers and rethink the 15 percent cap on indirect study costs that the Trump administration enacted. 'Combined, these actions have resulted in an unprecedented reduction in NIH spending that does not reflect efficiency but rather a dramatic reduction in life-saving research,' they stated. 'Some may use the false impression that NIH funding is not needed to justify the draconian cuts proposed in the President's Budget. This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research.' NIH research is not solely centered in Bethesda. The agency is responsible for funding research projects across the country and abroad. Numerous lawsuits have been filed to combat the pulling back of billions of dollars in NIH funding. Last week, a federal judge allowed a suit filed by university researchers and public health groups challenging the cuts to move forward. Bhattacharya responded to the letter on the social media platform X. 'We all want @NIH to succeed and I believe that dissent in science is productive. However, the Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions NIH has taken in recent months,' he wrote. Bhattacharya said the actions taken at NIH have been to 'remove ideological influence from science' and further argued the agency hasn't halted international scientific collaboration but is instead 'ensuring accountability.' 'Claims that NIH is undermining peer review are misunderstood. We're expanding access to publishing while strengthening transparency, rigor, and reproducibility in NIH-funded research,' he wrote. 'Lastly, we are reviewing each termination case carefully and some individuals have already been reinstated. As NIH priorities evolve, so must our staffing to stay mission-focused and responsibly manage taxpayer dollars.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Possible Medicaid cuts create deep sense of fear for Americans with disabilities
As the threat of cuts to Medicaid looms, Americans with disabilities are among those most at risk. Audrey Presby and Jeremy Fraser, co-hosts of "The Audrey and Jeremy Show" join Ali Vitali to share what these cuts could mean for them. Kandi Pickard, National Down Syndrome Society President and CEO, also weighs in.
Business Wire
an hour ago
- Business Wire
Alliance for Food and Farming: 'Dirty Dozen' List Recommendations Cannot Be Substantiated
WATSONVILLE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Peer reviewed research published in the Journal of Toxicology found that the recommendation in the 'Dirty Dozen' list to substitute organic forms of produce for conventional does not result in any decrease in risk for consumers because residues on conventionally grown are so low, if present at all. The research also found that the list authors follow no scientifically established methodology in the development of their list. In fact, the 'Dirty Dozen' list authors admit that their list does not assess risk nor do they apply basic tenets of toxicology in the development of their list. From Environmental Working Group's (EWG) previous 'Dirty Dozen' report: 'The Shoppers Guide does not incorporate risk assessment into the calculations. All pesticides are weighted equally, and we do not factor in the levels deemed acceptable by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).' Further, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Pesticide Data Program (PDP) consistently finds that over 99% of foods sampled had residue levels well below EPA safety standards with 40% having no detectable residues at all. There is growing concern about the impact of inaccurate safety fears becoming a barrier to increased consumption of produce. One peer reviewed study found that when low income consumers were exposed to 'Dirty Dozen' list messaging, they stated they were less likely to purchase any produce – organic or conventional. In a report released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), only one in 10 Americans consume enough fruits and vegetables each day, which is unchanged from previous survey levels announced almost a decade ago. The report states that those living below or close to the poverty level were the least likely to meet produce recommendations. From the CDC: 'Continued efforts to increase fruit and vegetable consumption by improving access and affordability in diverse community and institutional settings will help mitigate health disparities among U.S. residents. Additional policies and programs that will increase access to fruits and vegetables in places where U.S. residents live, learn, work, and play, might increase consumption and improve health.' 'Consumers can and should disregard these types of lists,' says Dr. Sylvia Klinger, DBA, MS, RD, founder of Hispanic and Multicultural Nutrition Communications who serves on the AFF's Management Board. 'Simply follow the advice of dietitians and health experts and choose to eat more fruits and vegetables, which are rich in the vitamins and antioxidants that help our bodies fight and prevent diseases, improve overall health and increase lifespan.' For consumers who are still concerned about residues, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that washing fruits and vegetables under running tap water often removes or eliminates any residues that may be present. (Never use soaps or detergents to wash produce.) Learn more about the safety of all produce at The Alliance for Food and Farming is a non-profit organization formed in 1989 which represents organic and conventional farmers. Alliance contributors are limited to farmers of fruits and vegetables, companies that sell, market or ship fruits and vegetables or organizations that represent produce farmers. Our mission is to deliver credible information about the safety of fruits and vegetables.
