Latest news with #HarvardT.H.ChanSchoolofPublicHealth
Boston Globe
42 minutes ago
- Politics
- Boston Globe
How a researcher from Medfield created the go-to database of federal research cuts
Advertisement 'There was a lot of grief in that, because I know what's been lost,' Delaney said of seeing the status in black and white. 'The crazy thing is that there are thousands of grants in Grant Watch, and every single one of them entails loss somewhere.' Related : For five months, Grant Watch has provided a singularly detailed account of the devastation within American scientific research, as its biggest funder, the US government, has morphed into an unrelenting adversary. The website is a near-complete list of grants Advertisement Maintained by seven volunteers, the database is searchable by grant status (frozen, terminated, possibly reinstated), university affiliation, or key details, such as a project's title or award number. The people behind the project scrape government websites and review submissions from scientists to add entries. A researcher examined samples on the campus of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health on June 11. Kent Dayton/Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Crowdsourced and consistently accurate, Grant Witness has become a go-to tool for journalists, lawyers, congressional staff, and even some universities themselves, counting the money no longer flowing to their coffers. Root around the website, and you'll find money axed for Related : A tiny slice of those funds went to Delaney, an affable lawyer-turned-epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He received a He coaches his kids' soccer, picks them up from summer camp, and frequents the Blue Moon Bagel Cafe on Main Street, where most midday patrons are twice his age. Advertisement On a muggy July day, Delaney entered the spot in neon orange HOKA shoes and ordered a double-shot cappuccino, before recounting the story of Grant Witness from day one. When NIH money started to disappear in February, the initiative started as a perfunctory Google spreadsheet to keep tabs on what projects were cut, and why. Then Harvard epidemiology professor Brittany Charlton connected Delaney to Noam Ross, executive director of the science data tracker Delaney in his office at his Medfield home. Suzanne Kreiter/Globe Staff 'This started as, 'Is this something we can find out beyond people's social media posts essentially?'' said Ross, a Brooklyn, New York resident. 'Everyone had complementary initiatives going on.' Now Delaney and his colleagues share weekly Wednesday meetings, early morning Signal messages, and midnight coding sessions to keep up with the latest in research news between their day jobs in data science, biotechnology, and academia. They won a small grant in June to pay a part-time staffer and are searching for additional private investment. In the meantime, volunteers across states are compensated in goodwill for creating a research archive that meets the moment, amid obligations to kids and jobs and grocery runs, said Anthony Barente, a Boston-based data scientist among the group's volunteers. 'My brain is set up to be a data hoarder. When I started this project, I didn't realize what the data would be used for, and I didn't really care,' he said. 'It's all a record for people to take forward, because none of us have been able to fully elucidate how science is changing right now.' Related : Advertisement And Grant Witness's to-do list keeps growing: Checking for more lost grants. Monitoring whether reinstated research projects actually receive their next checks. Adding canceled Environmental Protection Agency grants to the site. And automating features of the website to reduce the need for manual updates. Then there are all the media interviews and endless calls from fearful scientists phoning Delaney to help, vent, or puzzle through what comes next. He once talked about the project as something that would last days or weeks. Now it's years. 'There wasn't an exit strategy at the beginning. There still isn't,' Delaney said. 'We're in this until the end.' But that 'end' feels only more and more amorphous. The shock-and-awe announcements of big funding cuts have waned, but academics are girding for a future of smaller federal investments in all kinds of science. Researchers today scarcely know who to call at grant-making agencies anymore, and even those whose funding remains intact worry about whether the money will flow as planned. Related : The negotiation between Harvard and the White House is a toss-up, too. It could lead to research dollars being returned to campus scientists — 'My best case scenario,' Delaney said — or push President Trump to make good on threats to international student visas and The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, where Delaney works, in Boston. SOPHIE PARK/NYT To Delaney, much of the utility of his database is in providing ammunition for lawsuits to defend research funding. He started his career as an attorney at a big firm. After a recession-era layoff, he hopped between countries to train lawyers advocating for former child soldiers in Burundi and work as a public defender in Palau. Eventually, a stint living with employees of the global health nonprofit Partners in Health inspired Delaney to pursue epidemiology. He got his masters in public health in Baltimore, before moving to Massachusetts for his doctorate at Harvard. Advertisement Now, as universities battle the White House in court, Grant Witness is referenced in lawsuits about NIH dollars, NSF funding, and another that relates to the Trump administration's actions against Harvard. A complaint in court is a tangible vehicle for hope, Delaney said, but he still struggles to dodge cynicism every day. A child of the 1980s, Delaney often thinks about how much money has been unwound for AIDS and HIV research. He's horrified to see grants cut for suicide prevention efforts for transgender children. Funding revocations for research projects led by women and people of color make Delaney question why the background of a scientist has any impact on the credibility of their science. It moved him to seriously heed warnings about the country shifting, away from democracy towards authoritarianism. 'The people pointing to the most extreme possible consequences are oftentimes dismissed,' he said. But 'when the most extreme versions of terrible things start happening, we should probably start listening to those that are warning us.' As for Delaney personally, the options are dizzying. He made peace with the fact that he will likely no longer work at Harvard by Halloween and may leave epidemiology entirely — though he won't depart Grant Witness. Delaney not-so-silently hopes that universities stand their ground against threats to their academic freedom and research enterprise. But he hopes they survive either way. Advertisement 'We've come to appreciate that the fight is bigger than we thought it was,' Delaney said. 'Or maybe I didn't have a thought at all about how big the fight was. It's just that it's a damn big fight.' Diti Kohli can be reached at
New York Post
18 hours ago
- Health
- New York Post
Higher cancer rates linked to WWII waste in Midwestern creek
A Missouri creek has allegedly led to a higher risk of cancer in neighboring residents. Coldwater Creek, a Missouri River tributary north of St. Louis, has been a known radioactive waste site since the 1980s. Researchers have now confirmed that exposure to the creek, which is said to be polluted with nuclear waste from the development of the first atomic bomb, has led to an increased incidence of cancer for people who were children in the area between the 1940s and 1960s. A study from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, which was published in JAMA Network, analyzed the data of 4,209 participants who lived near Coldwater Creek. The data was originally gathered for a previous study on childhood radiation exposure. Participants who lived in the Greater St. Louis area between 1958 and 1972 shared their cancer diagnoses, which allowed researchers to calculate risk based on their proximity to the creek. 4 Researchers have now confirmed that exposure to the Coldwater Creek has led to an increased incidence of cancer for children in the area between the 1940s and 1960s, due to nuclear waste. AP The researchers found an elevated risk of cancer in a long-term follow-up, with those who lived closest to the creek reporting a higher incidence of most cancers. 'The waste from these entities could have huge impacts on people's health, even at lower levels of exposure.' In total, 24% of study participants reported having cancer. Of those, 30% lived less than one kilometer away from the creek, 28% lived between one and five kilometers away, 25% lived between five and 20 kilometers away, and 24% lived more than 20 kilometers away. 4 Susie Gaffney poses for a photo along Coldwater Creek near where she used to live Friday, April 7, 2023. AP 4 24% of study participants reported having cancer, and 30% of that percentage lived less than one kilometer away from the creek. REUTERS Corresponding author Marc Weisskopf, professor of environmental epidemiology and physiology at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, commented on these findings in a press release. 'Our research indicates that the communities around North St. Louis appear to have had excess cancer from exposure to the contaminated Coldwater Creek,' he said. 'These findings may have broader implications — as countries think about increasing nuclear power and developing more nuclear weapons, the waste from these entities could have huge impacts on people's health, even at these lower levels of exposure.' This study accompanies Congress' passing of an expanded version of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), as part of President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. The act will allow Americans, including Coldwater Creek residents, to receive compensation for medical bills associated with radiation exposure, the researchers noted. 4 This study accompanies Congress' passing of an expanded version of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which would allow Americans to receive compensation for medical bills associated with radiation exposure. AP Local agencies have become increasingly concerned about cancer prevalence in the area, prompting the push for further research beyond the U.S. government's acknowledgment of the pollution four decades ago. The contamination originally occurred due to the Manhattan Project and Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, which processed and refined uranium in St. Louis, according to the study. The radioactive material was moved out of the major U.S. city and into the more rural area near Coldwater Creek, where it was stored in uncovered drums on the ground and exposed to the elements, allowing contaminants to leach into the nearby creek. The researchers noted that communities downstream from Coldwater Creek had potentially been exposed to the ionizing radiation during recreational activities, such as playing in the creek, and residential activities, like breathing in dust suspended from the soil when gardening. The study did have some limitations, the researchers acknowledged, including its small sample size and reliance on self-reported cancer outcomes. The potential carcinogenic impact of creek exposure warrants further research to confirm the findings, the team concluded. Co-author Michael Leung, PhD, post-doctoral research fellow at Harvard's Department of Environmental Health, reflected on the findings in an interview with Fox News Digital. 'Our study found that children in the 1940s to 1960s who lived near Coldwater Creek, which was contaminated by radioactive waste from the development of the first atomic bomb, had a 44% higher risk of cancer compared to those living further than 20 kilometers away,' he confirmed. 'Our findings coincide with Congress passing an expanded version of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, and gives further credence to the health concerns of St. Louis area-residents about the contaminated creek,' Leung went on. 'We hope these findings will support public health measures for affected communities, as well as ongoing efforts to remediate the creek.'
Economic Times
5 days ago
- Health
- Economic Times
New research challenges 50-50 myth: Biological sex of children may not always be random
Biological sex of children may not always be random A new study is turning our understanding of biological sex determination on its head. Long taught in biology class as a 50-50 genetic lottery between X and Y chromosomes, the sex of a child may not be entirely random. According to new findings published in Science Advances on July 18, individual families may have skewed odds toward consistently having either boys or girls — and age, genetics, and environmental factors may be involved. Led by epidemiologist Dr. Jorge Chavarro of Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the study analyzed data from the historic Nurses' Health Study , one of the largest and longest-running fertility databases in the world. Examining more than 58,000 pregnancies between 1956 and 2015, researchers looked at patterns of sibling sex within families, maternal age, and genetic data. While the broader population showed the expected close-to-even split between male and female births, something surprising appeared at the family level: some couples appeared more likely to have children of the same sex — and not by random one in three families in the study had children all of the same sex — all boys or all girls — a figure notably higher than simple probability theory would predict, especially in families with three or more researchers developed a statistical model suggesting that each couple might have their own "unique probability" of producing a child of one sex or the other. While this individual bias remains balanced out when looking at large populations, it could significantly affect outcomes within families. 'It's not that boys or girls are more common overall, but that the odds may not actually be 50-50 for everyone,' said Dr. Chavarro. The effect appeared even stronger in women who had their first child later in life. This suggests possible biological shifts over time, potentially influencing which type of sperm — X-carrying (girl) or Y-carrying (boy) — is more likely to fertilize the women age, for example, vaginal pH and cervical mucus composition change, potentially favoring sperm carrying specific chromosomes. X sperm tend to be larger and more resilient, possibly giving them a better chance at success in slightly more acidic environments, which can develop later in life. The study also uncovered two genetic loci that may be linked to the likelihood of having children of the same sex. However, these genes do not appear to be directly involved in known reproductive pathways — their role is mysterious and not yet fully understood. 'These are just initial hints,' Chavarro explained. 'They point to a potential genetic influence on sex bias, but don't yet explain the mechanism.' This finding opens new doors for genetic and evolutionary biologists to explore how heritable factors may interact with environmental and physiological variables to influence offspring findings, while intriguing, are not without controversy. Australian psychologist and behavioral geneticist Dr. Brendan Zietsch remains previously worked on a large Swedish study analyzing millions of birth records, which found no evidence of consistent sex patterns within families. He believes that the U.S.-based cohort (95% white, mostly nurses and health professionals) may not be representative enough to make broader study could reshape how we understand fundamental reproductive biology. For couples puzzled by having multiple same-sex children — and others praying for variety — the research may provide both insight and assurance. While conception still carries an element of chance, it may not be as random as previously also raises huge questions for future research: Could IVF or fertility treatments one day account for these biological skews? Could genetics or maternal physiology be guided to increase the chances of balancing the family tree?
Time of India
5 days ago
- Health
- Time of India
New research challenges 50-50 myth: Biological sex of children may not always be random
A new study challenges the understanding of sex determination. It suggests families might have a bias toward having children of the same sex. The research, led by Dr. Jorge Chavarro, analyzed data from the Nurses' Health Study. Some couples were more likely to have all boys or all girls. Maternal age and genetics may play a role. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Same-sex siblings: More than mere coincidence? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Does parental age factor in? Genetics: A new frontier? Contrasting views from the scientific community Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads A new study is turning our understanding of biological sex determination on its head. Long taught in biology class as a 50-50 genetic lottery between X and Y chromosomes , the sex of a child may not be entirely random. According to new findings published in Science Advances on July 18, individual families may have skewed odds toward consistently having either boys or girls — and age, genetics, and environmental factors may be by epidemiologist Dr. Jorge Chavarro of Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health , the study analyzed data from the historic Nurses' Health Study , one of the largest and longest-running fertility databases in the world. Examining more than 58,000 pregnancies between 1956 and 2015, researchers looked at patterns of sibling sex within families, maternal age, and genetic the broader population showed the expected close-to-even split between male and female births, something surprising appeared at the family level: some couples appeared more likely to have children of the same sex — and not by random one in three families in the study had children all of the same sex — all boys or all girls — a figure notably higher than simple probability theory would predict, especially in families with three or more researchers developed a statistical model suggesting that each couple might have their own "unique probability" of producing a child of one sex or the other. While this individual bias remains balanced out when looking at large populations, it could significantly affect outcomes within families.'It's not that boys or girls are more common overall, but that the odds may not actually be 50-50 for everyone,' said Dr. effect appeared even stronger in women who had their first child later in life. This suggests possible biological shifts over time, potentially influencing which type of sperm — X-carrying (girl) or Y-carrying (boy) — is more likely to fertilize the women age, for example, vaginal pH and cervical mucus composition change, potentially favoring sperm carrying specific chromosomes. X sperm tend to be larger and more resilient, possibly giving them a better chance at success in slightly more acidic environments, which can develop later in study also uncovered two genetic loci that may be linked to the likelihood of having children of the same sex. However, these genes do not appear to be directly involved in known reproductive pathways — their role is mysterious and not yet fully understood.'These are just initial hints,' Chavarro explained. 'They point to a potential genetic influence on sex bias, but don't yet explain the mechanism.'This finding opens new doors for genetic and evolutionary biologists to explore how heritable factors may interact with environmental and physiological variables to influence offspring findings, while intriguing, are not without controversy. Australian psychologist and behavioral geneticist Dr. Brendan Zietsch remains previously worked on a large Swedish study analyzing millions of birth records, which found no evidence of consistent sex patterns within families. He believes that the U.S.-based cohort (95% white, mostly nurses and health professionals) may not be representative enough to make broader study could reshape how we understand fundamental reproductive biology. For couples puzzled by having multiple same-sex children — and others praying for variety — the research may provide both insight and assurance. While conception still carries an element of chance, it may not be as random as previously also raises huge questions for future research: Could IVF or fertility treatments one day account for these biological skews? Could genetics or maternal physiology be guided to increase the chances of balancing the family tree?
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Tracking Medicaid patients' work status may prove difficult for states
A construction worker sprays water on his face during a break in maintenance work along Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. States and the District of Columbia that expanded Medicaid must begin verifying millions of enrollees' monthly work status by the end of next year — a task some critics say states will have a hard time carrying out. (Photo by) States must begin verifying millions of Medicaid enrollees' monthly work status by the end of next year — a task some critics say states will have a hard time carrying out. A provision in the tax and spending bill President Donald Trump signed into law July 4 will require the 40 states plus Washington, D.C., that have expanded Medicaid to check paperwork at least twice a year to ensure those enrollees are volunteering or working at least 80 hours a month or attending school at least half time. The new law provides states $200 million for fiscal year 2026 to get their systems up and running. But some experts say states will have difficulty meeting the deadline with that funding and worry enrollees might lose their health benefits as a result. A year and a half to comply is likely not going to be enough time for most states, especially since the federal government must craft guidance on how they should implement their programs, said Dr. Benjamin Sommers, a health economist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He predicted it will be difficult to create technology simple enough — such as a phone app — to streamline the process for all enrollees. 'Two hundred million [dollars] is not going to cover the 40 expansion states that we have,' he told Stateline. 'There is not a silver bullet here, and there isn't a single app out there that's going to keep people who should be in Medicaid from losing coverage. That's just not realistic.' Medicaid cuts could be devastating for the Delta and the rest of rural America A spokesperson for the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Hannah Jones, told Stateline that 'it will take a significant amount of time and investment in order to implement work requirements.' Jones said an estimated 255,000 people in North Carolina could lose coverage because of these requirements and their 'administrative burden.' 'More automation reduces manual work on beneficiaries and eligibility case workers, but it requires more time, funding, and staff resources to implement,' Jones wrote in an email. Emma Herrock, a spokesperson for the Louisiana Department of Health, wrote in an email that the vast majority of the state's Medicaid enrollees already work, and the agency expects few people to be disenrolled. Herrock said the department will establish work verification systems by the end of 2026. 'The department is taking a thoughtful approach to implementation,' Herrock wrote. 'We are already working with several Louisiana agencies … in order to receive data on recipients who are working.' She added that the department views work requirements 'as a means to grow our economy, while reinforcing the value of work and self-sufficiency.' In New York, it could cost the state $500 million to administer the new requirements, New York Department of Health spokesperson Danielle De Souza wrote in an email. Between 600,000 and 1.1 million individuals who are eligible for and enrolled in Medicaid could potentially lose coverage because of work reporting requirements, she wrote, based on what happened when states were required to resume checking eligibility after the COVID-19 health emergency ended. 'The department will remain steadfast in its commitment to protecting the health of all New Yorkers and will work to mitigate the impacts of this law,' De Souza wrote. The new rules apply to states that expanded Medicaid to adults between the ages of 19 and 64 with incomes below 138% of the federal poverty line (about $22,000 for an individual), an option that was made available under the 2010 Affordable Care Act. More than 20 million people were enrolled through Medicaid expansion as of June 2024 — those are the patients who will face work requirements. There isn't a single app out there that's going to keep people who should be in Medicaid from losing coverage. That's just not realistic. – Dr. Benjamin Sommers, health economist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Reapplying for Medicaid, which typically has been required once a year, already is burdensome for some patients, said Dr. Bobby Mukkamala, president of the American Medical Association. 'On top of that, now we're going to be challenging so many people who were at least able to deal with it financially with things like … proving that they got a job,' Mukkamala said in an interview. Previous attempts at implementing work requirements have ended up costing states millions in administrative and consulting fees. And in some cases, people who were eligible for Medicaid lost their coverage due to paperwork issues. Several states wanted to implement work requirements during the first Trump administration. But only Arkansas fully did so, in 2018, before a federal judge halted the requirements. More than 18,000 Arkansas residents lost Medicaid coverage during the 10 months the requirements were in effect. States push Medicaid work rules, but few programs help enrollees find jobs Sommers, of Harvard, noted that most people were disenrolled because they didn't know about the policy or made paperwork errors, not because they weren't working. 'Red tape led to people losing their coverage,' he said. 'They had more trouble affording their medications. They were putting off needed care.' Brian Blase, president of the Paragon Health Institute, a conservative policy group that advises congressional Republicans, said he thinks concerns about the new requirements are overblown because there's more advanced technology now. 'Lots of government programs have initial implementation challenges,' Blase told Stateline. 'Arkansas was seven years ago, and if you just think about the change in the technological advancements over the past seven years … we didn't have artificial intelligence and just the ability of modern tech.' As it stands, each state has varying technological capabilities, and will have a different timeline and budget, said Michael Heifetz, a managing director at consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal and a former Medicaid director in Wisconsin. His team contracts with states to implement Medicaid, including work requirements, and other programs. He also noted that the Trump administration can give states a deadline extension on implementing work requirements to Dec. 31, 2028, if they show they are making a 'good faith effort.' States will need to share data across agencies in new ways, he said. 'It will require some form of data sharing and communications with educational agencies, workforce training agencies and some other agencies that typically aren't in the Medicaid ecosystem,' Heifetz said. State governments may resist hiring full-time positions for those tasks, he said, but 'artificial intelligence and other tools can help work through these processes in a smoother fashion.' Efforts in other states to implement work requirements have had mixed results. In Georgia, for example, an experimental work requirement program cost taxpayers more than $86 million in its first 18 months but enrolled just 6,500 people during that time, according to an investigation by ProPublica and The Current published in February. That's 75% fewer participants than the state had estimated for the program's first year. States that enshrined Medicaid expansion in their constitutions could be in a bind The nonpartisan U.S. Government Accountability Office in 2019 looked at five states that tested systems to track Medicaid work requirements under the first Trump administration. Those demonstration projects were rescinded during the Biden administration. The states estimated their projected administrative costs for implementing work requirements for one to three years, and the total far surpassed the $200 million Congress has provided in the new law. Kentucky alone estimated $270 million, Wisconsin $70 million, Indiana $35 million, Arkansas $26 million and New Hampshire $6 million. Susan Barnidge, an assistant director on the GAO health care team and an author of the report, said the agency found that across states there wasn't much federal oversight of administrative costs on test programs. Oversight will be key as states roll out their work requirement systems, she said. 'We found some weaknesses in [federal] Centers for Medicare & Medicaid oversight of certain federal funding for certain administrative activities. So we found examples of things that states sought federal funding for that didn't appear to be allowable,' Barnidge said in an interview. 'I think that will remain relevant.' Mukkamala, of the American Medical Association, said the burden will in some ways fall to doctors' offices to help keep patients enrolled, as they work with patients to check eligibility and possibly help get them on Medicaid. He works in Flint, Michigan, as an otolaryngologist, or ear, nose and throat doctor, and said a third of his patients are on Medicaid. 'As if it's easy to take care of their health care issue, given things like prior authorization,' Mukkamala told Stateline. 'Now to add to the challenge, we have to figure out how to get them covered.' Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@ SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Solve the daily Crossword
