Trump Administration Set to Eliminate Key Climate Research Centers

Posted on December 17, 2025 by

The Trump administration has announced plans to dismantle Colorado’s National Center for Atmospheric Research, which is the largest climate research institute in the federal state.

Russ Vought, the White House Director of Management and Budget, revealed the proposal on Tuesday. In a statement on X.

“The National Science Foundation intends to dissolve the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado,” Vought stated. According to a USA Today report. “This facility is a core source of concern regarding climate change in our country. A thorough review is in progress, and vital activities related to climate research will be reassigned to another organization or location.”

This action could pose a significant blow to U.S. climate research, as United Nations and other global leaders indicate that time is running out to avert the dire consequences of global warming.

The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, NCAR’s parent organization, issued a statement on Tuesday. They acknowledged awareness of the closures but had no further details.

“We are eager to collaborate with the administration to ensure the security and prosperity of our nation remains a top priority,” UCAR President Antonio Busalacci stated.

In response to an NBC News inquiry about NCAR’s fate, a senior White House official criticized Colorado Governor Jared Polis, a Democrat.

“Perhaps if Colorado had a governor willing to engage with President Trump, it would be more beneficial for voters,” said the official.

The official characterized NCAR as “a prominent research center perpetuating left-leaning climate change ideologies” and asserted that dismantling NCAR would “put an end to the research activities linked to the Green New Scam.”

Polis responded on Tuesday. He mentioned that Colorado has not received any communication about plans to dismantle NCAR, emphasizing that such actions would equate to an assault on science if confirmed.

“Climate change is a real issue, but NCAR’s contributions extend well beyond climate research,” Polis stated. “NCAR supplies crucial data on severe weather incidents like fires and floods, aiding our nation in safeguarding lives and property. If these cuts proceed, we risk losing our competitive edge against foreign adversaries in scientific exploration.”

Many within the climate and weather field expressed shock at this announcement.

Daniel Swain, a climatologist at UCLA, remarked: I commented on X that this would represent a “significant setback for American science.”

“This will disrupt not only climate research but also studies on weather, wildfires, and disasters that have supported decades of advancements in forecasting, early warnings, and resilience improvement,” Swain said, noting that the repercussions would cascade throughout the global weather and climate communities.

“NCAR has likely played an unparalleled role in enhancing weather forecasting and atmospheric modeling compared to any other organization worldwide,” he added.

Katherine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist and chief scientist at the Nature Conservancy, asserted that dismantling NCAR would be “akin to using a sledgehammer on the foundation of our scientific understanding of the planet.”

“Almost everyone studying climate and weather, not just in the U.S. but globally, has benefited from NCAR’s invaluable resources,” she mentioned on X.

Andy Hazelton, an associate scientist at the University of Miami’s Oceanic and Atmospheric Institute, described the decision to move resources as “incredibly shortsighted.”

Some Democratic representatives have pledged to fight against the closure of NCAR.

“This represents a dangerously blatant act of retaliation from the Trump administration,” stated Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colorado, whose constituency includes the climate research hub. I posted on X. “NCAR is a leading scientific facility globally, with our scientists engaging in pioneering research every day. We will use every legal avenue to combat this reckless directive.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Aligning Anticancer Drug Administration with the Body Clock Could Enhance Survival Rates

Posted on December 9, 2025 by

Timing chemotherapy properly can reduce side effects.

Paul Springett/Alamy

It is often said that timing plays a crucial role, and cancer treatment might be no exception. Researchers have discovered that adjusting the timing of immunotherapy drugs administered to cancer patients can enhance survival rates, adding to the evidence that our body’s internal clock affects cancer treatment efficacy.

The activities of cells and tissues within our bodies follow a 24-hour cycle termed the circadian rhythm, which governs everything from hormone release to cell division and repair timing. These rhythms are frequently disrupted in cancer cells, which tend to divide uncontrollably rather than at set intervals.

This has led to efforts aimed at alleviating chemotherapy side effects by targeting quickly dividing cells while the healthy tissue is less active. However, researchers are also exploring whether administering cancer drugs at particular times can enhance their efficacy.

One class of drugs under scrutiny is immune checkpoint inhibitors, which enable immune T cells to more effectively identify and target tumors. “T cells and other immune agents are naturally more active in the morning, making them more responsive,” explains Dr. Celine Ismail Sutton at Easbeatty Gwynedd Hospital in Bangor, England, who was not part of the study. “Administering immune checkpoint inhibitors during this window may bolster antitumor effects and enhance effectiveness.”

Earlier this year, ze fan and colleagues from Central South University in Changsha, China, documented that giving the checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab before 11:30 a.m. alongside chemotherapy to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) resulted in a survival rate that nearly doubles compared to those receiving treatment primarily in the afternoon.

To assess whether timing treatments in accordance with circadian rhythms, termed chronotherapy, could benefit patients with rapidly dividing, aggressive small cell lung cancer, the same team analyzed data from 397 individuals treated with the checkpoint inhibitors atezolizumab or durvalumab alongside chemotherapy from 2019 to 2023.

“Patients treated before 3 p.m. exhibited significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival in comparison to those treated later in the day,” reported team members. Zhang Yongchang, also at Central South University, noted.

After accounting for numerous confounding variables, early treatment appeared to be associated with a 52% reduced risk of cancer progression and a 63% decreased risk of mortality.

Zhang suspects that this effect may manifest in additional tumor types, referencing evidence from studies on renal cell carcinoma and melanoma. Research on NSCLC trials illustrated that morning dosing boosts circulating T cell levels and activation, while later dosing does the opposite. Mouse studies have shown that the behavior of tumor-infiltrating T cells fluctuates throughout the 24-hour cycle and that circadian clocks in adjacent endothelial cells influence when immune cells migrate into tumors.

While larger randomized controlled trials are essential, this investigation “adds further support to a growing number of studies globally that indicate improved outcomes when immunotherapy drugs are administered earlier in the day,” states Pasquale Innominato from the University of Warwick, UK.

But is it feasible for hospitals to implement this? When it comes to modifying treatment schedules, “adjusting infusion times is a straightforward clinical decision that incurs minimal costs,” asserts Zhang.

Nevertheless, treating everyone early in the day isn’t practical. According to Robert Dalman, also at the University of Warwick, each person’s body clock varies. “For instance, the biological time discrepancy between an ‘early bird’ and a ‘night owl’ can span several hours.”

Nonetheless, biomarkers that accurately assess individuals’ chronotypes are currently in development. Once established and validated, chronotherapy could emerge as a “cost-effective, resource-efficient innovation with the capability to significantly enhance treatment outcomes. A simple shift in timing can unveil a new facet of precision medicine,” concludes Ismail Sutton in a recently published perspective on this innovative strategy.

Topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Trump Administration to Repeal Certain Protections Under the Endangered Species Act

Posted on November 20, 2025 by

On Wednesday, the Trump administration took steps to reduce the scope of the Endangered Species Act, reinstating modifications from the president’s first term that had previously been blocked by a federal court.

The proposed modifications include removing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s “blanket rule,” which automatically safeguards plants and animals once they are deemed endangered. Instead, government agencies will be required to formulate specific regulations for each species, a process that may be time-consuming.

This announcement from the administration follows ongoing pressure from Republican lawmakers and industries such as oil, gas, mining, and agriculture, who have called for reforms to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Critics argue that the law is too broadly applied and hampers economic growth.

Environmental advocates, however, have cautioned that these changes could significantly delay conservation efforts for species like the monarch butterfly, Florida manatee, California spotted owl, and North American wolverine.

Rebecca Riley, managing director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, stated, “They’re attempting to revert to the time when they first weakened the law. We are opposing this, and the Biden administration is working on reversing many of the adverse changes made.”

Scientists and government agencies have indicated that extinction rates are accelerating. Species populations globally are declining due to habitat loss and various pressures. Earlier proposals in President Trump’s second term sought to revise the definition of “harm.” These regulations, grounded in the Endangered Species Act, could allow logging projects on national forests and public lands to bypass species protections.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum commented that the administration aims to restore the original purpose of the Endangered Species Act while also considering “the livelihoods of Americans who rely on our lands and resources.”

“These adjustments eliminate years of legal uncertainty and governmental overreach, thereby providing clarity for states, tribes, landowners, and businesses, and ensuring conservation efforts are based on sound science and common sense,” Burgum stated.

A further proposed change requires authorities to consider potential economic repercussions when identifying critical habitats necessary for a species’ survival, an action that environmental groups claim the 1973 law explicitly prohibits.

This approach could potentially result in species being classified as endangered while allowing ongoing practices that continue to endanger their survival.

Noah Greenwald, co-director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Endangered Species Program, remarked, “What the Trump administration is attempting to do is quantify costs. If you’re aiming to protect the spotted owl, they’re trying to factor in how much that protection would cost. Historically, such costs haven’t influenced decisions regarding critical habitat protections.”

An example involving the Southwest sawfish highlights the possible repercussions of these proposals. The lizard population in Arizona’s Mule Mountains is rapidly declining due to rising temperatures, driving the reptiles towards the highest mountain peaks, pushing them closer to extinction.

A petition filed on Wednesday seeks protection for the lizard and the designation of critical habitat. Advocates believe that an economic impact assessment could hinder timely protections. The primary threat to this spiny dragon population is climate change, which could complicate critical habitat designations further.

“We feel this species should be classified as endangered. Frankly, we are somewhat astonished that this species is not already extinct,” stated John Wiens, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Arizona, who co-authored the petition.

Earlier this March, the Department of the Interior faced legal action from the Real Estate Environmental Research Center (PERC) and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation over the comprehensive protection rule. Both organizations claimed the rule was illegal and would hinder states and landowners from facilitating species recovery efforts.

Designating species as “threatened” under the comprehensive rule allows them to automatically receive the same protections as those categorized as “endangered,” which are more stringent. This could lead landowners to become apathetic toward the survival of endangered species, as regulations may remain unchanged even if efforts are made to reclassify endangered species to “threatened” status.

PERC Vice President Jonathan Wood characterized Wednesday’s proposal as a “necessary adjustment” following the Biden administration’s actions.

“This reform acknowledges the illegality of the omnibus rule and re-centers recovery efforts within the Endangered Species Act,” Wood expressed.

During its initial term, the Trump administration also took action on the northern spotted owl and gray wolf.

The decision regarding the spotted owl was reversed in 2021 after it was found that political appointees had utilized flawed scientific data to justify opening millions of acres of forest on the West Coast to logging. Protections for wolves, on the other hand, remained in effect across most of the United States, only to be reinstated by federal courts in 2022.

The Endangered Species Act, established 50 years ago, continues to have widespread support. According to a recent poll, approximately 84% of Americans endorse the protections that the law affords.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Big Tech Promises User Protection Amid Spyware Firms’ Rise in Trump Administration

Posted on November 11, 2025 by

Apple and WhatsApp have committed to continue alerting users if their devices are targeted by government hacking software, particularly in the United States, as two spyware companies aim to penetrate the Trump administration.

The two tech giants provided statements in response to questions from the Guardian, as two Israeli-founded cyber weapon manufacturers, now under U.S. ownership, aggressively seek access to the American market.

Paragon Solutions, known for its spyware called Graphite, has already reached an agreement with the Trump administration to provide U.S. immigration officials with one of the most advanced hacking tools globally as of September, following the unfreezing of a $2 million contract by the Department of Homeland Affairs with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

Paragon did not reply to requests for comment.

NSO Group, another firm cited by the Biden administration in 2021 for conducting business “that goes against the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States,” revealed over the weekend that David Friedman, former U.S. ambassador to Israel during Donald Trump’s initial term, will become executive chairman of the parent company that owns NSO. The company has reportedly been recently acquired by new investors, including American film producer Robert Simmons.

Both Paragon and NSO Group develop spyware capable of infiltrating any phone without the knowledge of the user, enabling the spyware operator to read texts, eavesdrop on calls, track locations, and turn mobile devices into wiretapping tools or remote cameras.

While both companies defend their products as tools to combat serious crimes and thwart potential terrorist activities, their software is also weaponized by government clients to spy on individuals they wish to monitor covertly, including journalists, business leaders, and human rights advocates.

Apple and WhatsApp have consistently opposed the proliferation of spyware worldwide, notifying users via alerts when potential hacking attempts are detected in various countries, including Italy, Spain, and India.

In October, a U.S. court ruled in favor of WhatsApp after six years of legal battles, preventing NSO from targeting WhatsApp users in the future.

However, concerns arise due to the close connections between Apple, WhatsApp’s parent company Meta, and the Trump administration regarding whether they will persist in warning users amid such spyware threats in the United States.

“Threat notifications are intended to individually inform and assist users who may be victims of mercenary spyware, irrespective of geographic location,” Apple stated.

“WhatsApp aims to safeguard our users by disrupting hacking attempts from mercenary spyware, advancing protective measures, and notifying those whose devices are under threat, no matter where they are globally,” commented a WhatsApp representative.

Former FBI Director Christopher Wray testified that the FBI considered utilizing NSO’s Pegasus but ultimately declined to incorporate commercial spyware into its operations. Experts express concern over the legality surrounding the use of spyware in the United States, given existing laws that restrict targeted surveillance of Americans.

An aide to Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence, mentioned that current immigration officials provided a preliminary briefing to his office, stating that “the policy is still under development,” but there has been no feedback since the government shutdown began in October.

When asked about the potential lifting of sanctions imposed on NSO by the Biden administration in 2021, Friedman mentioned during a phone call from Israel that he has yet to discuss the matter with President Trump, stating, “I hope that happens, but I have not made that request yet.” He added it is “too early to determine” when NSO may pursue the removal of these sanctions.

Regarding mercenary spyware, John Scott Railton, a senior research fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Research Institute, warns that “no one is safe.” He is recognized as a leading authority on tracking and disrupting spyware usage against civil society members globally.

“American firms are unprepared to detect and defend against this type of menace domestically, similarly to healthcare institutions, legal professionals, politicians, and the general populace,” he noted. “The last thing America needs now is a silent spyware epidemic.”

Paragon initially signed a contract with ICE in 2024 under the Biden administration. The relatively small agreement went unnoticed by the White House until its official announcement, several insiders disclosed. Wired reported. The contract was subsequently suspended to ascertain whether it complied with a significant executive order issued earlier. Signed by the White House in May 2023, it prohibited the operational use of spyware that “poses a risk to national security or has been exploited by foreign entities for human rights violations globally.”

At that point, Paragon was free from surveillance controversies, unlike NSO Group, which faced scrutiny for its Pegasus spyware targeting a plethora of civil society organizations.

However, the situation shifted in January 2025 when WhatsApp disclosed that 90 individuals, including journalists and civil society members, had been targeted by Paragon’s Graphite.

Following this revelation, Paragon severed its ties with the Italian government, alleging that Italy violated its service terms by using spyware against civil society members.

Since then, media accounts have detailed how several Italian journalists, at least two executives from Italy’s largest bank, an Italian human rights advocate, and an Italian political strategist were targeted by hacking spyware in 2024.

The current government led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has admitted that the software was employed against certain activists by Italian agencies with legal authority, but has not accepted responsibility for other prominent targets.

“This is Italy’s Watergate,” remarked former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi in an interview.

“This is a tool that only governments can wield. If the Italian government continues to deny its usage, the question for multiple Italian business leaders and journalists remains, who is responsible?” he said. “I may not be closely aligned with journalists, but freedom of the press is essential in a free democracy. Using this tool against journalists is intolerable.”

Some officials are worried that this Graphite may now be under the control of U.S. immigration authorities.

“ICE is already undermining due process by hastily detaining children and families who pose no threat, ruining lives,” Wyden stated to the Guardian. “I am extremely concerned about how ICE will utilize spyware, facial recognition, and other technologies to further infringe upon the rights of American citizens and those whom Donald Trump views as adversaries.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Trump Administration is Distorting Reality.

Posted on November 8, 2025 by

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc (via Getty Images)

Peek-a-boo is an entertaining game for young children. Due to their limited understanding of object permanence, hiding faces from babies brings joyful smiles as they try to grasp what’s happening in the world around them.

Playing this game with the wealthiest and most powerful nation may not be as amusing, but the Trump administration has certainly given it a shot.

For years, U.S. federal agencies carried out extensive public health research to guide policies addressing issues like drug addiction and food insecurity. However, these invaluable data collection efforts have now been significantly reduced or entirely scrapped (see, US public health system is flying blind after deep cuts).

By figuratively covering its eyes, the U.S. government seems to be wishing these challenges will vanish, when, in reality, the opposite is likely to occur.

As we learned during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, data, monitoring, and preparedness are crucial for preventing disasters. Statistical agencies and data collectors aren’t just collecting data; they’re our frontline defense against uncertainty.

“
Not all heroes wear capes, but some do their best to create them from spreadsheets.
“

The U.S. isn’t alone in this forgetfulness. The UK’s Office for National Statistics, once regarded as exemplary, has experienced a decline in recent years. Facing issues of poor-quality data and inaccurate statistics due in part to a lack of funding.

A significant part of the issue is the perception of this type of work as dull. No politician ever gained votes by vowing to conduct surveys on every mailbox, and statisticians hardly become celebrities.

However, this needs to change. Not all heroes wear capes, but some strive to craft them from spreadsheets. This vital data-driven work deserves recognition and reinforcement. Governance without object permanence is ill-advised, and sadly, the United States is on the brink of discovering this reality.

Source: www.newscientist.com

Nvidia Invests $5 Billion in Intel Following 10% Stake from Trump Administration

Posted on September 19, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Nvidia, a top player in the semiconductor industry, has revealed plans to invest $5 billion in Intel while collaborating with struggling chip manufacturers on various products.

Following confirmation that the Trump administration has secured a 10% stake in Intel, Nvidia announced that it will collaborate with the company on custom data centers essential for artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure and personal computer products.

Intel’s stock surged nearly 23% after market hours, marking the company’s largest single-day percentage gain since 1987. Nvidia’s stock also climbed by over 3%, enhancing its market valuation to $400 billion.

Nvidia plans to invest $5 billion in Intel common stock at a price of $23.28 per share, pending regulatory approval.

“This groundbreaking partnership combines two leading platforms, accelerating the computing stack with Nvidia’s AI capabilities and Intel’s CPUs within the extensive X86 ecosystem,” stated Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia. “Together, we will expand our ecosystem and lay the groundwork for the next era of computing.”

The companies announced their intention to “seamlessly integrate the architecture.”

For data centers, Intel develops custom chips that Nvidia utilizes in its AI infrastructure. For PC products, Intel manufactures chips that incorporate Nvidia technology.

This deal presents a crucial opportunity for Intel, a pioneering force in Silicon Valley that experienced decades of growth fueled by the personal computer surge but has struggled after failing to adapt to the mobile computing trend initiated by the iPhone’s 2007 launch.

In recent years, Intel fell further behind during the AI boom that propelled Nvidia to become the world’s most valuable company. Last year, Intel reported a loss of nearly $1.9 billion, followed by another $3.7 billion in the first half of this year, along with plans to reduce its workforce by a quarter by the end of 2025.

Conversely, Nvidia is experiencing significant growth, driven by its specialized chips that support the artificial intelligence trend. Graphics processing units (GPUs) have proven particularly efficient in developing advanced AI systems.

Nvidia is the second firm to invest billions in chip manufacturers this year. In August, Japan’s leading high-tech investment firm, SoftBank, announced a $2 billion investment in Intel for a 2% stake in the company. SoftBank’s involvement follows initial reports regarding the US government’s plans to invest in Intel.

Donald Trump has been striving to bolster the US semiconductor sector, previously threatening to implement 100% tariffs on imported chips. He also brokered an export agreement with Nvidia and competitor AMD, which permitted the sale of certain low-power AI chips to China.

Experts believe Nvidia’s recent investment in Intel could strengthen the position of major chip manufacturers and potentially provide the impetus needed for Intel to compete effectively in the AI arena.

“According to Wedbush’s tech analyst Dan Ives: [Nvidia’s] world is waiting for more sovereignty, with businesses lining up for the world’s most advanced chips, while everyone else pays a premium.”

Reports contributed by the Associated Press

Source: www.theguardian.com

Introducing a Health Tracking System in Collaboration with Big Tech and the Trump Administration

Posted on July 31, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration is advancing initiatives encouraging millions of Americans to submit personal health data and medical records to new applications and systems managed by private tech firms, aiming to enhance the accessibility of health records and wellness monitoring.

Donald Trump is anticipated to announce the East Room initiative on Wednesday afternoon. This event will feature leaders from over 60 companies, including major tech giants like Google and Amazon, alongside prominent hospital systems such as the Cleveland Clinic.

The focus of the new system will be on diabetes and weight management, using conversational AI to assist patients, and providing digital tools like QR codes and apps for patient registration and medication tracking.

This initiative is spearheaded by an administration that openly shares highly sensitive data about Americans, pushing the limits of legal boundaries, with the hope that such medical information will remain confidential while improving convenience in the doctor’s office.

“There are substantial ethical and legal concerns,” noted Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University with expertise in public health. “Patients across the U.S. should be significantly concerned about how their medical records may be used to their detriment and that of their families.”

Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), responsible for maintaining this system, emphasize the importance of choosing to share medical records and data to ensure patient safety.

These officials expressed the need for a system that allows patients to access their records easily, eliminating traditional obstacles like the use of fax machines that previously hindered this process.

“We currently possess tools and information that can enhance patient outcomes and healthcare experiences,” stated Dr. Mehmet Oz, CMS administrator, on Wednesday. The CMS already holds data on over 140 million Americans enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid.

Noom, a well-known weight loss and fitness subscription service participating in the initiative, will be able to access medical records following the anticipated launch of the system early next year.

This access may include lab results or medical tests that the app can leverage to generate AI-driven insights to assist users in weight loss, according to CEO Geoff Cook’s comments to The Associated Press. Apps and health systems will also have access to competitors’ information. For instance, Noom will grant access to users’ data from Apple Health.

“Currently, we have a lot of siloed data,” Cook remarked.

Tomislav Michaljevic, CEO of the Cleveland Clinic, noted that patients traveling for treatment often struggle to compile their medical records from various providers. He conveyed that the new system would eradicate this barrier, preventing delays in treatment and ensuring accurate diagnoses by providing complete medical histories.

Mihaljevic added that data from the health app is now readily accessible to doctors, aiding in the management of obesity and other chronic conditions, including tracking patients’ dietary habits and physical activity levels.

“These apps provide valuable insights into a patient’s health between doctor visits,” he emphasized.

Skip past newsletter promotions

CMS also offers a selection of Medicare.gov apps aimed at aiding individuals in managing chronic illnesses, selecting healthcare providers, and choosing insurance plans.

Digital privacy advocates are doubtful about the safety of patients’ data storage.

The federal government has done very little to regulate health applications and telehealth services, according to Jeffrey Chester of the Center for Digital Democracy.

This new initiative is poised to expand the pool of patient information accessible to both the federal government and high-tech firms. Medical records often contain sensitive data that includes patient-doctor conversations and notes on issues like substance abuse and mental health history.

“This initiative represents a gateway for the further use and commercialization of sensitive personal health data,” Chester commented.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and those in his circle are also advocates for wearable devices that monitor health and telehealth, promoting increased technological advancements in healthcare.

Kennedy has expressed a desire to gather more data from American medical records, previously mentioning intentions to utilize this data to research autism and vaccine safety. He has engaged with agency staff who possess backgrounds in health tech startups and businesses.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Trump Administration Decides Against Posting Extensive Climate Change Report on NASA’s Website

Posted on July 15, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Here’s a rewritten version of your content:

On Monday, the Trump administration advanced efforts to complicate access to a crucial legally mandated scientific evaluation regarding the risks climate change poses to the nation and its citizens.

Earlier this month, the official government website indicated its authority, stating that the peer-reviewed national climate assessment was moving offline. These platforms provide essential information for state and local governments and the public regarding what to expect from climate change and how to adapt accordingly. At that time, the White House stated that NASA would host the report to comply with the 1990 Act Requiring Reporting.

However, on Monday, NASA declared the cancellation of those plans.

According to NASA, “The USGCRP (the agency that oversaw and utilized the report) fulfills its statutory obligations by presenting the report to Congress. NASA has no legal requirement to host data from GlobalChange.gov,” meaning no coordinated assessments or data from governmental scientific offices will be routed to NASA.

On July 3, NASA released a statement affirming, “All existing reports will be accessible on the NASA website to maintain continuity in reporting.”

“This document was produced for taxpayers and includes vital information necessary for people to protect themselves in changing climates,” said the Chief Scientist of the Nature Reserve, a co-author of several previous national climate assessments.

Copies of past reports remain accessible at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s library, and you can view the latest reports and their interactive atlas here.

John Holden, a former scientific advisor to the Obama White House and a climate scientist, accused the administration of blatant misinformation regarding its intentions to censor or obscure the report.

“This new approach exemplifies a classic misunderstanding characteristic of the Trump administration,” Holden stated. “They initially aim to soothe outrage over the discontinuation of the GlobalChange.gov site and the disappearance of the national climate assessment, only to retract their reassurances without apology two weeks later.”

“They simply do not want the public to have access to detailed and scientifically validated information concerning climate change’s impact on agriculture, forests, fisheries, as well as storms, floods, wildfires, and coastal properties.

Holden emphasized the significance of these reports for state and local authorities and the general public, asserting that they “aid in understanding how climate change is affecting people’s lives, their loved ones, their properties, and their environments.”

“Trump is intentionally keeping people in the dark,” Holden asserted.

The most recent report published in 2023 revealed that climate change is impacting the safety, health, and livelihoods of individuals across the country in various ways, putting them at an increased risk.

Feel free to modify any part further as needed!

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Judges Evaluate Legality of Trump Administration Cuts at the National Institutes of Health

Posted on June 17, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On Monday, a federal judge in Boston ruled that the termination of grants from the National Institutes of Health signals the end of efforts aimed at diversity-related research topics. Trump’s administration has claimed this decision was “invalid and illegal,” citing discrimination against racial minorities and the LGBTQ community.

US District Judge William Young stated in a non-judicial trial that the NIH breached federal law by capriciously canceling over $1 billion in research grants linked to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

Judge Young indicated he is reinstating grants awarded to organizations that advocated for such initiatives in democratically led states. He also mentioned that as the case unfolds, more significant decisions might follow.

“This amounts to racism and discrimination against the American LGBTQ community,” remarked Young, a Republican appointee of President Ronald Reagan. “Government discrimination is profoundly wrong; I urge the court to prohibit it, and I will take action in due course.”

Discussing the end of grants for research addressing racial minority issues, Young expressed from the bench that he has “never witnessed such blatant racism” in his 40 years on the bench.

“You judge people of color based on their skin,” he stated concerning the Trump administration. “The Constitution does not permit that.”

The Department of Health and Human Services, representing the NIH and its parent organization, has not responded promptly to requests for statements.

Rachel Meelopol from the American Civil Liberties Union, who represents the grant recipients in the lawsuit, mentioned that Young’s ruling impacts hundreds of grants. The plaintiffs include the American Public Health Association and 16 states led by Massachusetts.

The NIH, the world’s premier funder of biomedical and behavioral research, has terminated approximately 2,100 research grants worth about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since President Donald Trump took office in January. I signed on to protest the cuts last week.

These funding cuts reflect Trump’s broader agenda to reshape the government, reduce federal expenditures, and eliminate support for DEI programs and transgender healthcare. Another federal judge has temporarily blocked the administration’s plan to reduce 10,000 jobs across the NIH and other health agencies.

Trump has also enacted a series of executive orders mandating that institutions ensure grant funding does not support “gender ideology” and puts an end to what the administration deems “discriminatory” DEI programs. Conservative critics argue that these DEI initiatives unfairly target white individuals and others.

Aligned with Trump’s policy objectives, the NIH has directed staff to cease grant funding for research on DEI programs, issues facing transgender individuals, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and funding beneficial to universities in China.

The trial presided over by Young on Monday focused on just a portion of the claims in the consolidated litigation regarding the funding cuts. He intends to consider additional claims later.

Young indicated he would allow political parties to present further evidence before making decisions regarding these claims and determine whether to restore grants beyond those allocated to the plaintiffs.

The cessation of NIH grants, coupled with delays in grant approvals and renewals, has reverberated across universities nationwide, many of which now face the loss of significant portions of their research budgets.

As a result, universities have initiated employment freezes, travel restrictions, reduced class sizes, furloughs, and layoffs.

Numerous universities depend on NIH grants for the majority of their research funding. For instance, Washington University, recognized as the top public institution for biomedical research, reported receiving roughly 1,220 grants from the NIH, totaling about $648 million last year, as per court documents.

Students and faculty at universities have expressed concerns that the funding confusion could lead to brain drain from the United States, as researchers increasingly seek positions abroad. This slowdown also threatens long-term research initiatives, including projects focused on banking and studying the brains of Alzheimer’s patients.

The Trump administration has aimed to reduce other critical research funding sources.

In February, US District Judge Angel Kelly halted regulations that severely restricted government payments for indirect research costs, including equipment, maintenance, utilities, and support staffing. The administration projected that this action would eliminate $4 billion in funding for research institutions.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Scientists Seek Public Support Amid Trump Administration Funding Cuts

Posted on June 12, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

While scientists pursuing cancer therapies find ample support, those researching diseases in potatoes face greater challenges in garnering attention and funding.

The Trump administration seems to have adopted the notion that many scientific pursuits are viewed as unnecessary or opaque, resulting in billions in proposed cuts to research funding.

Amidst this crisis, researchers are exploring innovative ways to garner public and political backing to counteract funding reductions.

A collective of Cornell graduate students aims to reshape public perceptions of science. They have enlisted over 500 researchers from all 50 states to write OP-EDs for local newspapers, which are set to be published next week. This initiative was proposed by Emma Scales, a Cornell doctoral student involved in the campaign.

“We’re engaging with people who are frustrated by the lack of transparency regarding funding allocations,” Scales explained. “I understand that I’m one of those who utilizes your resources. I apologize for not communicating better, but I’d appreciate feedback about my work.”

Isaco di Tomasi, Hannah Frank, Emma Scales, and Alex Rand lead the Cornell Policy Club, coordinating McClintock’s letters.
Courtesy Emma Scale

The initiative, known as McClintock Characters, is one of several ongoing efforts by graduate students and faculty aimed at the same goal.

This reflects a mainstay belief that researchers cannot assume public support is a given. If proactive measures aren’t taken soon, many are beginning to realize that the public’s trust in scientists is waning, and funding may not be reinstated.

Science Homecoming letter-writing campaigns urge scholars to emphasize the importance of government investments in scientific endeavors. The new nonprofit, Stand Up for Science, is organizing demonstrations at State Fairs and Farmers Markets this summer, along with community Teach-Ins and Open Lab Days. Another new group, Your Neighborhood Scientist, publishes essays by researchers and fosters community-based dialogues about science.

Audrey Dorottos, a neuroscientist from the University of Pennsylvania and co-founder of Your Neighborhood Scientist, sees her work as a means for scientists to express their enthusiasm.

“We aren’t just contributing static noise; we aim to humanize scientists, which is a fundamental objective,” she said.

Di Tomasi is delving into the fungal disease that contributed to the potato famine in Ireland.
Courtesy Isako di Tomassi

The motivation behind the McClintock letters emerged in February when Isako Di Tomassi, a plant pathology doctoral student, expressed his frustrations online after losing his PhD advisor at the US Department of Agriculture due to recent significant government layoffs.

While Di Tomassi encountered some sympathy online, one commenter remarked that funding cuts were beneficial since they halted “frivolous research,” and many others expressed confusion regarding the purpose of their studies.

Di Tomasi and Scales began brainstorming solutions through the Cornell Advanced Science and Policy Club to facilitate researchers sharing their narratives.

They organized these efforts in tribute to the late Nobel Prize-winning cytologist Barbara McClintock, timing their actions for her birthday on June 16. Her research altered scientists’ understanding of genetic inheritance in corn, laying the groundwork for advancements in treating genetic disorders in humans.

Barbara McClintock, a pioneer in genetic research at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in Long Island, NY, circa 1947.
AP

“Barbara McClintock is incredibly renowned,” Di Tomasi remarked.

Nevertheless, Di Tomasi noted that the aim is to bridge the gap between scientific professionals and public understanding, emphasizing that even routine experiments can be pivotal for medical and scientific advancements.

Researchers have committed to discussing a variety of topics, from breast cancer metastasis to memory formation and sustainable grape cultivation. Based on the collective audience sizes targeted by the organizers’ chosen news outlets, they anticipate reaching 8 million potential readers.

During a webinar on June 6, Katherine Xue, a microbiologist at the University of California, Irvine, guided about 100 participants on composing OP-EDs, using a 2015 OP-ED by Newt Gingrich advocating for increased research funding as a reference.

Xue encouraged participants to avoid technical jargon and to inject personal elements. She intends to write an article for her hometown newspaper in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, highlighting how her high school internships fueled her interest in microbiology.

“As scientists, we are conditioned to maintain a sense of detachment, but this approach has limitations,” Xue explained to NBC News. “Many people don’t see scientists as relatable, nor do they grasp what we are doing and why. This can lead to distrust in science.”

Recent surveys back up her assertions, revealing that while 76% of Americans express confidence in scientists, this number has dwindled from 87% in 2020, as reported by a Pew Research Center study. The report also noted that a majority of Americans believe scientists are poor communicators, and nearly half feel that scientists view themselves as superior.

The notion of supposedly frivolous research projects has long been a target for criticism. Some senators have highlighted what they perceive as wasteful spending in scientific research.

In a speech to Congress, Trump criticized what he considered absurdly funded projects backed by the Biden administration, including research misrepresented as making mice transgender (though in reality, it examined the effects of hormones on health and fertility). The White House defended the President’s comments.

In response to inquiries regarding the reduction of research funding, White House spokesperson Kush Desai stated that the administration is aligning with voter priorities. “The American people have tasked President Trump with recalibrating government expenditures to align with their values,” he clarified in an email. “The administration is committed to fulfilling this mandate.”

President Donald Trump criticized federally funded research during a congressional address on March 4th.
Allison Robbert/AFP via Getty Images

For her upcoming book, Salmon Cannon and Floating Frog, Carly Ann York, an animal behaviorist at Lenore Lynn University in North Carolina, spotlighted several scientists who have faced scrutiny to advocate for their research.

One professor included in the book reacted with humor to the label “waste” applied to her research by participating in collaborative efforts with fellow scholars, like creating a mini science fair on Capitol Hill, to share research insights on shrimp combat inspiring new body armor designs for humans.

Carly Ann York became committed to scientific communication after grappling with explaining her studies on squid physiology to others years ago.
Courtesy Carly York

“I hope more scientists adopt this mindset,” York stated. “It’s our responsibility to help the public comprehend how taxpayer money is utilized in research, what we do, and the impact of our work.”

Will the McClintock letters and similar initiatives achieve their intended results? While it’s uncertain how many students and faculty will participate, many participants hope their goals reach beyond immediate outcomes.

According to Michael Rubel, a physics professor at New York City College and a former Director of Public Relations for the American Physical Society, success hinges on sustained engagement with the public.

Rubel remarked that scientists should actively participate by attending community groups like Rotary clubs, churches, or PTA meetings.

“If researchers wait for the public to come to them, they will only engage a fraction of the population, and I doubt this will effect meaningful change,” he stated. “Meet audiences where they are. Understand what they value. You might be surprised.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Trump Administration Backs Certain PFA Restrictions While Repealing Others

Posted on May 14, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced its support for drinking water standards concerning two hazardous “forever chemicals” that impact tap water for millions of Americans. However, it indicated plans to extend the deadline for relaxing regulations on four additional related substances.

PFAS refers to a vast category of chemicals commonly found in daily products, including non-stick cookingware, water-repellent clothing, stain-resistant carpets, and fire-fighting foams.

Research shows that exposure to PFAS, or Polyfluoroalkyl substances, may lead to metabolic disorders, lower birth rates in women, developmental delays in children, and a heightened risk of certain cancers such as prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers. As stated by the EPA.

President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is asking water providers for the first time to reduce the levels of six PFAS chemicals as close to zero as possible. He has imposed particularly stringent limits of four parts per 2 trillion units for two chemicals, known as PFOA and PFOS, which are frequently detected in drinking water systems.

The Trump administration endorsed these two PFAS regulations but allowed water providers to push back the deadline for compliance to 2031 by two additional years.

The EPA also announced the revocation of restrictions on four other chemicals.

“We are working to uphold national standards to safeguard Americans from harmful PFOAs and PFOS,” said EPA administrator Lee Zeldin in a statement. “At the same time, we aim to provide common-sense flexibility by allowing more time for compliance,” he added. “The EPA will continue utilizing regulatory and enforcement mechanisms to hold polluters accountable.”

Some efforts to relax PFAS regulations followed legal challenges from trade organizations and water providers connected to the chemical industry against the Biden administration’s restrictions.

These chemicals are so widespread that they can be detected in the blood of nearly every individual in the United States. Government studies have shown that PFAS chemicals are present in almost half of the country’s tap water.

In 2022, the EPA reported that these chemicals can cause harm at exposure levels “much lower than previously understood,” indicating that current exposure levels are nearly unsafe.

Under Biden-era regulations, water operators were mandated to monitor PFAS levels in the water supply. They also needed to inform the public and take action to lower contamination levels if they exceeded the prescribed limits: four parts for PFOA and PFOS, with 10 trillion parts for the other four chemicals.

These four chemicals include GenX, once deemed a safer alternative to PFOA, but now associated with liver, kidney, and immune system damage, along with developmental issues and cancer in animal studies. The other chemicals—PFHX, PFNA, and PFBS—are also linked to various negative health outcomes.

The agency intends to initiate a new rule-making process for these four chemicals in the fall, with plans to finalize new regulations by next spring.

The government’s initiative was first reported by the Washington Post.

Health and environmental advocates criticized these actions.

“We are committed to collaborating closely with our customers,” stated Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear, an environmental organization focused on GenX and PFAS pollution in the Cape Fear River of North Carolina.

“This administration has promised voters to ‘make America healthy again,’ yet it seems inconsistent to rescind some PFAS drinking water standards,” she said. “This is disrespectful to communities affected by PFAS contamination who are suffering from severe health issues and losses.”

Eric D. Olson, Senior Strategy Director for Health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, remarked that the EPA’s approach offers “reassuring but conservative comfort.”

However, he also pointed out that the agency’s attempts to roll back drinking water standards contravene the no-backsliding provisions stipulated in the Safe Drinking Water Act.

“The law clearly states that the EPA cannot eliminate or undermine drinking water standards,” he emphasized. “This behavior is not only damaging but is also against the law.”

Industry groups that have filed lawsuits against the Biden administration’s PFAS rules, including the American Water Association, the American Chemical Council, and the National Manufacturers Association, did not provide immediate comments.

In a statement accompanying the EPA’s announcement, Alan Roberson, executive director of the Association of State Drinking Water Managers, expressed his support for the Trump administration’s framework. This association represents drinking water program managers across all 50 states.

Roberson noted that states and water systems are “struggling with tight timelines” under Biden-era regulations to test for PFAS and to establish the infrastructure needed to filter these chemicals from the water supply.

This announcement follows Zeldin’s recent disclosure of a series of initiatives to combat PFAS contamination.

The agency mentioned plans to create guidelines on the permissible PFAS discharge volumes from plants and to collaborate with Congress on how to hold polluters accountable.

Documents from the Trump administration highlighted strategies to transition away from paper straws, while also stressing the health dangers posed by PFAS.

Maintaining stringent regulations for PFOA and PFOS is expected to impose a significant financial burden on water operators. The EPA estimates compliance costs could reach approximately $1.5 billion annually, while utilities believe this figure could double, ultimately impacting the public through increased water bills.

James L. Ferraro, an environmental attorney representing several water companies, stated that while the Trump administration’s stance represents a middle ground, “one utility didn’t necessarily agree with it.”

The chemicals PFOA and PFOS, which are under strict EPA oversight, remain “the most frequently detected due to their widespread use over many years,” and pose an ongoing challenge for numerous utilities, he explained.

Many environmental organizations argue that the costs associated with cleaning up PFAS should ultimately be borne by the chemical manufacturers. They note that evidence indicating the risks of PFAS has been hidden by chemical companies for decades, as revealed by lawsuits, industry documents, and litigation. According to peer-reviewed research.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Seeks to Lift Protections for Lesser Prairie Chicken in Texas Court

Posted on May 9, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has taken steps to revoke federal protections for the lesser prairie chicken, a vibrant grouse unfortunate enough to inhabit the southern and central grasslands, which have long been targeted for agricultural and energy development.

In a court filing on Wednesday, officials stated that the Fish and Wildlife Service mistakenly made a decision during the Biden era to classify these birds as endangered.

This move exemplifies the ongoing efforts of the White House to dilute or eliminate environmental regulations that hinder Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” agenda.

Furthermore, it marks yet another development in the ongoing struggle for the species, a battle that has persisted for 30 years.

Known for their unique courtship rituals of stomping, tail feather flicking, and “flapping,” the lesser prairie chicken’s population has plummeted from hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to only about 30,000 due primarily to habitat loss.

“President Trump will always advocate for the elimination of burdensome regulations affecting the American agriculture sector, particularly as numerous ranchers voluntarily engage in protecting lesser prairie chicken habitats,” stated White House spokesperson Anna Kelly.

The filing, submitted in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, aims to reevaluate the bird’s status by November 30, 2026.

While the species currently lacks protection under the Endangered Species Act, the filing asserted that “there are at least 16 different conservation initiatives and programs administered by state, federal, and private entities.”

Despite this, conservationists foresaw that the service would be under no obligation to reevaluate the species on its own timeline and would likely need to take legal action to prompt a review.

“The Trump administration is once again yielding to the fossil fuel industry, ignoring sound science and common sense while jeopardizing at-risk species,” stated Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“A political decision to remove protections for endangered species is one that would not hold up in court,” he added, noting his group’s involvement in the issue.

Back in 1998, federal wildlife officials acknowledged that fewer grassland chickens warranted conservation efforts but initially prioritized other species. This led to the bird being tangled in a legal battle, fluctuating in and out of protected status.

In 2022, protections for the lesser prairie chicken were reinstated under President Biden, which split the species into two distinct populations: the southern population (encompassing eastern New Mexico and eastern Texas) and the northern population (covering central Kansas, western Oklahoma, central Texas, and the northeastern Panhandle).

The oil and ranch sectors faced lawsuits in 2023, similar to those filed in Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma.

Currently, the Trump administration contends that the Fish and Wildlife Service mischaracterized the species as a cohesive group and is “precisely contaminating” the validity of this assessment.

The major global authority on species, the United Nations List for Nature Conservation, classifies the lesser prairie chicken as vulnerable, similar to the U.S. endangered list.

Rylander from the Center for Biological Diversity stated his intention to challenge federal motions in the days ahead. The struggle over the lesser prairie chicken continues as scientists warn about unprecedented levels of biodiversity loss in human history.

Temperate grasslands are recognized as among the most endangered ecosystems globally.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Reduces NIH Grants by Over $1.8 Billion

Posted on May 9, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration discontinued its $18.1 billion grant to the National Institutes of Health within just 40 days.

This information comes from an analysis published in JAMA on Thursday, which utilizes data from the Department of Health and Human Services to monitor accountability within the government grant system.

The analysis offers the most extensive overview to date regarding the reduction of NIH funding following the Trump administration’s significant efforts to eliminate perceived waste and inefficiency in federal spending.

Michael Liu, a student at Harvard Medical School, noted that while some grants are still uncertain due to new terminations and temporary revivals due to court orders, the HHS grant tracker remains the most reliable and current dataset available.

From February 28th to April 8th, the administration processed close to 700 grants at 24 NIH labs and centers, concentrating on areas such as aging, cancer, child health, diabetes, mental disorders, and neuropathy.

“These cuts haven’t been evenly distributed,” Liu remarked. “The National Institute on Health and Health Disparities in Minority has faced the steepest reductions, with approximately 30% of its funding cut—ten times the average.”

President Trump’s upcoming budget proposal aims to eliminate all funding for the National Institute focused on health disparities among minorities, labeling the Institute as “full of DEI spending.” His January executive order called for the cessation of a program centered on diversity, equity, and inclusion.

The proposal also suggests an overall reduction in NIH funding, slashing its budget for the next fiscal year to $27 billion, a decrease of around $18 billion, which would eliminate gender-focused research and studies on climate change. The administration plans to emphasize research on chronic diseases and other epidemics.

So far, most NIH grants that have been finalized have been directed toward research projects, with about 20% allocated to early career grants, training, or development. The analysis indicates that larger grants are more prone to termination, though it’s unclear if they were intentionally targeted based on the data.

“These sizable grants typically support large clinical trials and extensive research centers,” Liu explained. “Halting these initiatives is incredibly damaging, as it prevents patients from receiving necessary medications or interventions.”

Liu also pointed out that the analysis suggests that the rescinded grants are severely disrupted by both public and private institutions.

Among the grant recipients, Columbia University faced the highest number of terminations, totaling 157. The Trump administration targeted Columbia for funding cuts, citing “ongoing omissions at schools amid the persistent harassment of Jewish students” following significant Palestinian protests on campus. Columbia recently laid off 180 staff members associated with federal grants affected by these cuts.

“Columbia’s leadership continues to engage with the federal government to seek a resolution for resuming these research activities,” an official wrote in a letter to the Columbia community. “We are actively planning to address all potential contingencies, but tensions with federal authorities impact our financial situation and our research mission.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

State Calls Out Trump Administration for Freezing EV Charging Funding

Posted on May 8, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

A group of states spearheaded by Washington, Colorado, and California has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming it is unlawfully withholding billions of dollars designated by Congress for electric vehicle charging stations nationwide.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act of 2021 allocated $5 billion to states for the construction of charging stations across the country. Research firm Atlas Public Policy reports that 71 stations have been established thus far, with more on the way.

Litigation filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle states that the federal agency has unlawfully frozen these funds, halted the approval of new stations, deprived states of critical resources, and harmed the developing electric vehicle industry.

The White House’s Budget Proposals announced last week indicated a cancellation of funds for the “Failed Electric Vehicles – Charger Grant Program.” President Trump had already targeted the program in January. Presidential Order from the Transportation Department echoed similar sentiments the following month. However, the lawsuit contends that a Congressional approval is necessary to entirely revoke funding.

“The president is making unconstitutional efforts to withhold funds allocated to programs that Congress supported,” stated California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “This time, he’s unlawfully diverting billions meant for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, lining the pockets of his oil industry allies.”

California has approximately 2 million “zero emission vehicles” available, accounting for one-third of the national total, as part of an ongoing initiative in the car-centric state to reduce air pollution. According to Bonta’s office, California relied on $384 million from the federal program for charging stations.

The state has heavily invested in its charging infrastructure from its own budget and revenue from carbon credits sold to polluters, leading to more public and shared private chargers than gas station pumps. However, challenges remain when crossing state lines for charging.

The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, or NEVI Program, initiated by President Joseph R. Biden Jr., aims to establish charging networks across urban and rural areas, including California, to combat climate change.

California officials remarked that one of the main beneficiaries of the national EV program is China, which currently leads in EV manufacturing and global sales. The most significant detriment would likely fall on Tesla, a Trump supporter, whose CEO Elon Musk expects the company to lead the EV market, despite a decline in sales during the first quarter of 2025.

“When America retreats, China prevails,” California Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the federal fund withholding as “another Trump gift to China.”

“Instead of promoting Teslas on the White House lawn, President Trump should prioritize aiding Elon and the nation by adhering to the law and unlocking this bipartisan funding,” Newsom stated.

The lawsuit includes attorneys general from Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.

Transportation Department Notes indicate that state officials reported in February that the administration had considered the NEVI program and suspended approval of state plans. The lawsuit seeks a declaration that the memo is illegal and demands the administration release the funds.

An NEVI Funding Tracking Website operated by Atlas Public Policy shows that at least $521 million has been allocated, with approximately $44 million already spent. Data indicates that many operational stations are concentrated in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Loren McDonald, chief analyst at EV analytics firm Paren, commented that while the federal government plays a minor role in the EV charging sector, most stations are constructed by private companies. McDonald noted that the process of building the infrastructure and selecting contracting firms is lengthy and has led to delays. His experience with constructing charging stations reflects this trend.

That said, the plaintiffs asserted that the president’s orders have been detrimental.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser expressed that his state stands to lose tens of millions in funding after demonstrating significant advancements in establishing a robust foundation for electric vehicle adoption. He mentioned that federal support was crucial to bridging gaps in funding for rural Colorado and underserved communities.

“Congress showed foresight in approving funds for this essential infrastructure,” Weiser stated. “These funds need to be restored immediately.”

In Washington, the president’s directives halt 40 proposed projects and jeopardize $55 million in approved Congressional funding for electric vehicle charging infrastructures.

The White House and the Transportation Department have yet to respond to requests for comment.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Dissolves CDC’s Infection Control Committee

Posted on May 7, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has dissolved a federal advisory committee responsible for guidance aimed at preventing the spread of infectious diseases in healthcare settings.

The Healthcare Infection Control Practice Advisory Committee (HICPAC) created national standards for U.S. hospitals concerning practices such as handwashing, mask-wearing, and patient isolation for those with chronic illnesses.

Four committee members reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced the termination of HICPAC on Friday.

A letter obtained by NBC News — sent by the CDC following a virtual meeting — indicated that the committee ended over a month ago, on March 31. The letter referenced President Donald Trump’s Executive Order calling for significant cuts in the federal workforce.

Previously, four professional associations urged Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in a letter dated March 26 to retain the committee amid extensive reductions to federal health agencies. Neither the CDC nor the Department of Health and Human Services responded immediately to a request for comment on Tuesday.

Some of the committee’s web pages have been archived, meaning they are still accessible online but will no longer be updated.

Committee members are concerned that the guidelines could become outdated, failing to incorporate new scientific research or address the spread of drug-resistant organisms, as outlined in specific threats to hospitals.

“If things need to change, the guidelines may not adapt, leading to a precarious situation,” stated Connie Steed, a HICPAC member since 2023 and a former president of the Association of Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology.

Dr. Anurag Malani, a fellow at the American Infectious Diseases Society who joined HICPAC in January, noted that the committee was nearing the completion of new guidelines for airborne pathogens before its termination. Previous guidelines had not been updated since 2007 and controversially recommended surgical masks over N95 respirators for preventing the spread of specific pathogens.

“There was much valuable information available. The lessons learned from Covid were shaping our guidelines to improve our previous protocols,” Malani reflected.

Jane Thomason, lead hygienist at National Nurses United, expressed regret over the committee’s dissolution, highlighting that it hampers the transparency of public health guidance. HICPAC had appointed Thomason to a workgroup last year.

“Concerns have been raised regarding HICPAC’s composition and proposed guidance, but its closure eliminates significant public transparency,” Thomason stated on Tuesday. “Without public HICPAC meetings, there is no access to the drafting process for CDC guidance on infection control in healthcare settings, ultimately compromising the safety of patients, nurses, and other healthcare personnel.”

According to a CDC letter from Friday, HICPAC had issued 540 recommendations since its formation over three decades ago, with 90% fully implemented.

Malani emphasized the need for consistent infection control practices nationwide, asserting that ongoing recommendations are essential.

“We should prevent state and local health departments from having to navigate this independently,” he concluded.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Trump Administration Seeks Court Dismissal of Abortion Drug Lawsuits

Posted on May 6, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On Monday, the Trump administration requested a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit aimed at severely restricting access to the abortion pill Mifepristone. This aligns with the stance taken by the Biden administration in scrutinized cases that significantly affect abortion access.

Court filing This request by the Justice Department is unexpected, given President Trump’s and many officials’ strong opposition to abortion rights. Trump frequently claims that he appointed three Supreme Court justices in 2022 who voted to overturn national abortion rights, and his administration has actively sought to reduce programs supporting reproductive health.

This court filing marks the first instance where the Trump administration has engaged in litigation, significantly expanding access to Mifepristone as it aims to reverse various regulatory changes implemented by the Food and Drug Administration since 2016.

The request from the Trump administration does not delve into the substantial issues of the litigation that are yet to be adjudicated. Instead, it contends that the filings do not satisfy the legal criteria for consideration in the federal district court where the case was initiated, echoing the argument made by the Biden administration prior to Trump’s inauguration.

The plaintiffs in this lawsuit include the Conservative Attorney Generals from Missouri, Idaho, and Kansas, with the suit filed in the U.S. District Court in Texas.

“The state has not objected to the lack of connection between their claims and the Northern District of Texas,” a Justice Department attorney stated in the filing.

“The state cannot pursue this case in this court, regardless of the merits of the claims,” they concluded, emphasizing that the complaint “should be dismissed or relocated due to a lack of proper venue.”

The lawsuit also seeks to impose new FDA restrictions on Mifepristone, including prohibiting its use by individuals under 18. The goal is to address the rapid increase in the prescription of abortion medications through telehealth and the distribution of pills via mail to patients.

Originally filed in 2022 by a coalition of anti-abortion physicians and organizations, the lawsuit advanced to the Supreme Court. However, in a unanimous ruling last June, the judge dismissed the case, stating the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate harm related to the FDA’s decision on Mifepristone.

Months later, three attorneys revived the case by submitting an amended complaint as plaintiffs in the same U.S. District Court in Texas. The presiding judge, U.S. District Court Judge J. Kakusmalik, a Trump appointee opposed to abortion access, harshly criticized the FDA and adopted terminology reminiscent of anti-abortion activists in his ruling during the initial phase of the case.

In the United States, abortion drugs are prescribed up to 12 weeks of pregnancy and currently account for nearly two-thirds of abortions. Women in states with abortion bans are increasingly seeking abortion medications from telehealth providers.

Currently, Roe v. Wade is in effect across 19 states, which have stricter regulations than the standard established by Wade. State support for abortion rights has expanded telehealth options for abortion, and many states have enacted Shield Acts to protect healthcare providers who prescribe and send abortion medications to patients in states with prohibitions or restrictions.

Source: www.nytimes.com

20 State Attorneys General File Lawsuit Against Trump Administration to Reestablish Health Agencies

Posted on May 5, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On Monday, 20 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration concerning mass shootings and the dismantling of agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The legal action, spearheaded by New York Attorney General Letitia James, asserts that the administration breached numerous laws and circumvented Congressional oversight by attempting to streamline HHS from 28 agencies to 15, while planning to lay off about 20,000 employees.

James stated, “This administration hasn’t streamlined the federal government. They’re blocking it. If you terminate scientists researching infectious diseases, silence medical professionals caring for pregnant individuals, shut down programs supporting firefighters and miners, or hinder children’s development, you’re not improving America’s health. You’re jeopardizing countless lives.”

The restructuring announcement by HHS came in late March as part of the Department of Government Efficiency’s initiative to reduce the federal workforce. The cuts included layoffs of 3,500 employees from the Food and Drug Administration, 2,400 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and 1,200 from the National Institutes of Health.

HHS indicated it will establish a new institution, referred to as the Healthy American regime, to take on some responsibilities formerly held by the agencies being dissolved, including programs focused on mental, environmental, or worker health.

Nonetheless, the lawsuit claims that the recent cuts have “severe, complicated, prolonged, and potentially irreversible” effects. The Attorney General emphasized in a press release that the restructuring impaired HHS’s ability to perform critical functions, disrupting mental health and substance abuse services, weakening responses to HIV/AIDS, and diminishing support for low-income families and individuals with disabilities.

Specifically, the Trump administration has let go of staff responsible for maintaining federal poverty guidelines, which are essential for determining food aid, housing assistance, and Medicaid eligibility, as well as reducing teams managing the low-income housing energy assistance program.

Half of the workforce from the Department of Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services—one of the dissolved HHS agencies—has also been terminated. Consequently, the Attorney General reported that national investigations into drug use and health have come to a halt, and the federal team overseeing the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline has vanished.

The CDC has lost multiple labs that track infections, including those focusing on infectious diseases and tobacco control, as mentioned in the release. The team also monitored maternal mortality rates in the U.S. Additionally, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health has been disbanded, which previously played a role in screening workers’ health issues related to toxic exposure.

The Trump administration asserts that certain programs, such as the World Trade Center Health Program—which provides screening and treatment for 9/11-related illnesses—and health surveillance initiatives for coal miners will persist under the Healthy American administration. However, many NIOSH employees associated with these programs are facing administrative leave and potential termination by June, as indicated in an internal government memo obtained by NBC News.

The lawsuit filed on Monday demands that HHS dismantle the agency and cease its efforts to restore the vital programs that have been lost.

This lawsuit is not the first to contest the federal government’s downsizing efforts. A coalition of 23 attorneys general previously sued HHS in April over the termination of approximately $11 billion in public health funding. A federal judge temporarily blocked these cuts but has yet to issue a final ruling.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Trump Administration Unveils Overhaul of EPA, Streamlining Approval for New Chemicals

Posted on May 4, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to reassign scientists from independent labs to various departments.

Administrator Lee Zeldin disclosed these adjustments in a video statement, indicating that the agency is “reshaping scientific expertise” to concentrate on what are deemed “mission essentials.”

The most immediate impact will be on the Research and Development Bureau, the EPA’s primary research faction, which investigates aspects like the health and environmental repercussions of “eternal chemicals” in drinking water, as well as strategies to lessen airborne particulate pollution.

An internal document reviewed by the New York Times highlighted the Trump administration’s proposal to dissolve this office as part of a plan to eliminate 1,155 scientists, including chemists, biologists, and toxicologists engaged in health and environmental research.

While the changes weren’t enacted on Friday, the agency’s new focus areas were unveiled. According to Zeldin, 130 positions will transition to the office responsible for new chemical approvals, addressing the long-standing backlog cited by the Chemical Industry Group.

During the All Hands Staff Meeting later that day, Nancy Beck, a previous lobbyist for the American Council of Chemicals and now at the helm of the EPA’s chemicals office, reassured Scientists, remarking that it was a “very exciting time.”

She encouraged everyone in the agency to consider applying for these roles.

Officials from the Trump administration have indicated that further laboratory changes are on the horizon. A scientist on a call expressed concern that failing to transition to one of the new areas might result in job termination.

Additionally, on Friday, the EPA postponed the deadline for accepting withdrawal offers, which is now extended to May 9.

“This feels like a hunger game,” remarked a lab employee who opted for anonymity to avoid potential retaliation.

Other scientists will transition to managerial positions as part of the new office focused on applied scientific environmental solutions. Zeldin emphasized the need to “put science at the center of agency regulations.”

Democrats and environmental advocates have raised concerns that these changes could politicize scientific inquiry.

“This so-called ‘reorganization’ is merely a thinly veiled effort to diminish the agency’s globally respected scientific capacity by redistributing scientists and managing chemical assessments for the industry,” stated Deputy Director Cherry Pingley, a Democrat from Maine.

Chitra Kumar, managing director of the climate program at the federal advocacy group Concern Scientists Federal, warned that relocating scientists to policy offices “will expose these experts to political pressures, particularly in this administration.”

This shift occurs amidst the agency’s extensive deregulation initiative. Under Zeldin’s direction, the EPA has revised or rescinded over 30 regulations intended to safeguard air, water, and climate quality. Managers are also focused on dismantling the legal foundations of many climate regulations known as danger detection.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump Administration Plans Major Cutbacks to LGBTQ Health Research

Posted on May 4, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has terminated over $800 million in research related to the health of LGBTQ individuals, halting studies on cancers and viruses that predominantly impact sexual minority groups, and has intensified efforts to combat the resurgence of sexually transmitted infections, as highlighted by a New York Times analysis of federal data.

Reflecting its strong opposition to diversity initiatives and adolescent gender care, the administration has actively sought to eliminate standard measures and research affecting transgender health.

This crackdown reaches beyond specific issues, curtailing essential medical research on diseases disproportionately affecting LGBTQ populations, which constitute nearly 10% of American adults.

An examination of grant-related reviews revealed that out of 669 grants, 323—almost half—were fully or partially canceled in early May regarding LGBTQ health.

Federal authorities had earmarked $806 million for projects that were canceled, many of which were anticipated to generate additional funding in the coming years.

Numerous research institutions faced funding losses. This includes not just high-profile targets like Johns Hopkins and Columbia but also public universities in the South and Midwest like Ohio State University and the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

Florida State University has canceled a research initiative worth $41 million, which included significant efforts to prevent HIV among adolescents and young adults, who account for the majority of new infections in the U.S. each year.

In a cancellation letter issued in recent months, the NIH justified the reductions by stating that LGBTQ projects “no longer align with agency priorities.” In some cases, the agency claimed that the canceled research was “based on gender identity,” resulting in “unscientific” outcomes that disregarded “biological reality.”

Other termination letters indicated that researchers erred by focusing on “artificial and unscientific categories” primarily driven by vague equity objectives.

These funding cuts come after a decade of increased federal support for LGBTQ research, encouraged by the NIH during the Obama administration, which welcomed grant proposals that focused on sexual and gender minorities.

Supporters of President Trump contend that much of this research is tainted by ideological bias.

“There was a trend of scientific malpractice to align conclusions with preconceived notions,” stated Roger Severino from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank influential in shaping Trump administration policies.

“It was founded on the erroneous belief that biology is almost irrelevant, alongside the political agenda that sought to normalize the idea of changing one’s sex.”

Researchers stated that canceling research on a broad range of diseases affecting sexual and gender minorities has effectively created a perception of a hierarchy among patients, deeming some as less valuable.

“Certain segments of the U.S. population should not be considered inferior as subjects of research,” remarked Simon Rosser, a professor at the University of Minnesota, whose lab focused on cancer in LGBTQ individuals before significant funding was withdrawn.

“This is a clear example of bias,” he emphasized. “It’s a form of prejudice in scientific research.”

The cancellation of these projects is a striking indication of the widespread dismantling of the research framework that has supported medical study in the United States for the past 80 years.

In addition to halting studies, federal officials have delayed grant payments, postponed review meetings, and expanded new grant awards.

Recently, Trump proposed slashing the NIH budget from approximately $48 billion to $27 billion, citing part of a broader agenda perceived as aimed at combating “radical gender ideology.”

The legality of these terminations remains uncertain. Two separate lawsuits challenge the broad cancellation of grants, with a group of researchers and others arguing that the Trump administration lacked a lawful basis for these cuts in 16 states.

The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services have not provided comments upon request.

Health department spokesperson Andrew Nixon stated to the Daily Signal, a conservative outlet, last month that the shifts which “alleviate politicized gender and identity studies” were “in line with the president’s executive order.”

In a statement, the NIH commented: “NIH is taking steps to terminate research funding that does not align with NIH and HHS priorities. We are committed to reinstating traditions that support evidence-based science.”

Lost funding has hindered critical studies on antibiotic resistance, undiagnosed autism among sexual minorities, and specific cancers that disproportionately affect these groups. The funding cuts have resulted in layoffs at several LGBTQ-focused laboratories that were poised for expansion.

Historically, the NIH has reserved grant cancellations for rare instances of research misconduct or potential participant harm. Scientists now argue that the recent cuts are doing more harm than protection for research participants.

They indicated the cessation of clinical trials where federal funding is short, affecting the care of volunteer participants.

“We are halting initiatives that prevent suicide and sexual violence,” remarked Katie Edwards, a professor at the University of Michigan, whose funding for various clinical trials involving LGBTQ individuals has been canceled.

The HIV studies have been particularly severely impacted.

The NIH has terminated major grants to the Adolescent Medical Exam Network for HIV/AIDS interventions, a program that established precursors for using medication therapy in adolescents to prevent infections.

The regimen known as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, is recognized as a promising strategy to reduce HIV transmission in youth.

The funding reductions threaten to amplify HIV transmission among young sexual minority men using stimulants as they aim to monitor a continuous trial of products that prevent both HIV and unplanned pregnancies, alongside sexual health counseling and behavioral therapy.

With the termination of numerous other HIV studies, these cuts are undermining Trump’s aims established during his prior term to eradicate the national HIV epidemic within a decade, according to scientists.

The NIH has also halted efforts relating to other sexually transmitted infections.

Dr. Matthew Spinelli, an infectious disease researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, was in the midst of clinical trials on common antibiotics for post-exposure prophylaxis aimed at preventing syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia infections.

The trial involved a randomized study assigning participants to different antibiotic regimens to assess metabolism.

He hoped that the findings would provide valuable insights into the efficacy of treatments for women. He previously advocated for this research.

However, health officials ceased funding for the March study, objecting to research based on “gender identity.” Consequently, Dr. Spinelli could not apply federal funds to monitor participants already on antibiotics.

Moreover, he risked wasting thousands of doses of antibiotics acquired using taxpayer money. Dr. Spinelli warned that discontinuing efforts against infections like syphilis and HIV will allow new outbreaks to arise.

“The HIV epidemic is poised to surge again as a direct result of these actions,” Dr. Spinelli stated. “This is catastrophic for the communities affected.”

Despite a recent focus on the negative consequences of medical transition, federal officials have canceled several studies examining the potential risks of hormone therapies. These projects aimed to understand whether such treatments could elevate the chances of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease, brain development issues, or HIV.

Other canceled grants sought to address mental health challenges in transgender individuals. Transgender youth, who currently represent around 3% of high school students, report significantly higher instances of persistent grief and suicide attempts.

For Dr. Edwards at the University of Michigan, funding has been halted for one of her six canceled studies examining how depression and self-harm among transgender teens can be mitigated.

Another study aimed at promoting supportive care for LGBTQ youth and reducing dating violence and alcohol consumption among these individuals.

The NIH categorizes studies strictly by specific illnesses, complicating efforts for agencies to estimate budgets for LGBTQ health research. Nonetheless, a report from March suggested that such studies accounted for less than 1% of the NIH’s portfolio over a decade.

The Times sought to quantify the scale of funding cuts in LGBTQ medical research by assessing grant titles. Research summaries were available for each of the 669 grants the Trump administration identified as fully or partially canceled in early May.

The review included studies designed to recruit participants from sexual and gender minorities, extending beyond grants strictly tied to LGBTQ issues and highlighting significant health disparities.

Grants related to diseases outside of the LGBTQ scope were excluded from this assessment.

The Times focused solely on NIH research grants but acknowledged that the Trump administration also discontinued LGBTQ programs elsewhere in the federal health system, including proposals to eliminate specialized suicide hotlines for LGBTQ youth.

The reduction in funding has hollowed out fields that not only flourished over the past decade but also encompassed a variety of health threats beyond HIV.

Researchers claim young academics have lost their positions in LGBTQ-related research and are erasing traces of their work from online profiles.

Brittany Charlton, a professor at Harvard School of Public Health, had five grants canceled, including one examining the notable uptick in stillbirth rates among LGBTQ women.

Discontinuing research into health threats impacting gender and sexual minorities ultimately affects the broader population, she stated. “When those around you become ill, it impacts you too, even if you believe it doesn’t,” she concluded.

Irena Fan contributed reporting.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Private Organizations Rise to Fill the Science Gap Left by Trump Administration Cuts

Posted on May 3, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Following the rejection of numerous authors by the Trump administration for the upcoming national climate assessment, two scientific organizations have embarked on initiatives to publish special collections of climate change research.

Earlier this week, researchers were informed that their contributions would no longer be needed for the national climate assessment.

The future of this assessment is uncertain, and some authors have voiced concerns that its integrity is compromised, lacking scientific rigor or the ability to adequately convey the risks associated with climate change.

Robert Kopp, a professor of Earth and Planetary Science at Rutgers University and one of the authors affected by the recent decisions regarding the National Climate Assessment, commented:

In response to the administration’s actions, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) announced on Friday their plans to curate a special collection focused on climate research, as stated in press releases from both organizations.

As per the news release, this collection will span over 20 peer-reviewed journals and aims to “sustain momentum” in the work relevant to the National Climate Assessment, in light of the author and staff rejections.

AGU President Brandon Jones noted in a statement that this special collection is not meant to serve as an “alternative” to the national climate assessment but represents “a unique opportunity to publish new research and reviews that could support climate assessments focused on the U.S.”

The White House has not commented on the rationale behind the rejection of National Climate Assessment authors or the administration’s plans moving forward.

The 1990 Global Change Research Act mandates the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) to submit reports to the President and Congress every four years, with national climate assessments previously satisfying this obligation. These reports summarize the best available science on climate change physics, its effects on the U.S., and societal adaptations. They also include localized climate forecasts for various regions to inform the public about community risks.

The latest assessment, published in 2023, comprised around 2,200 pages across 37 chapters. It highlighted that the lower 48 states have experienced an average warming of 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1970, alongside increasingly severe weather events and costly disasters.

“If you’re a state official, business leader, or a member of the public looking to understand the impacts of climate change on the economy, coastal areas, or human health,” Kopp stated:

The National Climate Assessment is a culmination of the efforts of hundreds of researchers volunteering their time, although it is organized by USGCRP staff. In April, the White House ceased funding for this organization.

“I have no insight into the plan; I don’t think anyone does,” Kopp remarked. “They have let go of all the authors and staff of the Global Change Research Program, leaving some government positions currently unfilled.”

The USGCRP website currently states, “We are reviewing the operation and structure of USGCRP.”

Kopp mentioned that the authors of the National Climate Assessment had dedicated about a year to summarizing the chapters intended for their 2027 report and evaluating relevant themes. This summary has already been submitted for review to the federal agency, and the authors are now considering how best to proceed with it.

“We cannot replicate the NCA unless there is an organization prepared to take charge and staff up,” Kopp concluded.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

The Trump Administration Endangers Key Climate Change Reports

Posted on April 30, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Climate change contributes to events like the Marshall Fire in Colorado, which devastated 1,000 homes in December 2021

Jim West/Alamy

The Trump administration has dismissed nearly 400 researchers involved in the forthcoming US national climate assessment. This action may delay the completion of a critical report detailing the impacts of climate change on the nation.

“The Trump administration has carelessly undermined a vital US climate science report by prematurely discarding its authors without justification or a plan,” said Rachel Cleetus, representing the concerned coalition of scientists.

This move significantly hampers progress on the sixth National Climate Assessment, designed to inform federal and state governments about climate change risks and their implications. A law enacted by Congress in 1990 mandates that these assessments be produced every four years.

Although the next report isn’t due until 2027, extensive work has already begun, and the document may exceed 1,000 pages. The latest review, published in 2023, discussed the increasing difficulty of ensuring safe homes, healthy families, dependable public services, sustainable economies, and thriving ecosystems amidst climate challenges.

In early April, the Trump administration terminated a contract with a consulting firm responsible for coordinating research for upcoming assessments under the US Global Change Research Program. This follows numerous cuts at scientific institutions contributing to these efforts, as well as other actions restricting climate and weather research.

Despite the challenges, the report’s authors (mostly volunteers) were eager to collaborate, according to Dustin Mulvaney, who was focused on the Southwest section of the report at San Jose State University. “Many of us thought, ‘We can still do this!'”

However, with all the authors now released, completing the report appears unlikely.

A NASA spokesman, responsible for the global change research program, chose not to comment. Yet, some report authors stated to New Scientist that they received a brief notification indicating that all authors had been dismissed as agents assessed the “scope” of the evaluations.

The notification mentioned “future opportunities” for contributions. Ultimately, Congress legally requires these assessments, and the administration can still appoint new authors. Earlier reports emphasized climate risks, while new analyses will likely focus more on how the US is responding to climate change through reduced emissions and infrastructure adaptation.

Even if the report is eventually published, it may lack the rigor and reliability found in previous assessments, according to Mijin Cha, who was working on emission reductions at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “Now they’ve completely compromised it.”

“I think everyone is really disheartened by this situation,” she expressed.

Topics:

Climate change/
Donald Trump

Source: www.newscientist.com

Trump Administration Rejects Author of the National Climate Assessment

Posted on April 29, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has dismissed numerous scientists and experts who were working on the federal government’s key report regarding the impacts of global warming on the nation.

This decision, which is obligatory in Congress, poses significant risks to the future of the National Climate Assessment, according to experts.

Since 2000, the federal government has released an in-depth report every few years detailing how rising temperatures influence human health, agriculture, fisheries, water resources, transportation, energy generation, and various aspects of the U.S. economy. The latest climate assessment was published in 2023. This report is utilized not only by state and local authorities but also by private enterprises, assisting in preparations for extreme weather events, floods, droughts, and other climate-related challenges.

On Monday, researchers nationwide began the preparation for the sixth National Climate Assessment, scheduled for early 2028, only to receive an email indicating that the report’s scope is “currently under review” and all contributors have been dismissed.

“We are now liberating all existing assessment contributors from their roles,” the email stated. “As the evaluation plan progresses, there may be future chances for contribution or involvement. Thank you for your service.”

For some authors, this felt like a devastating setback for the next report.

“This could signal the end of the assessment,” remarked Jesse Keenan, a professor at Tulane University specializing in climate adaptation and a co-author of the previous climate assessment. “If we eliminate all involved, there will be no advancement.”

The White House has not yet responded to requests for comments.

Climate assessments are generally compiled by volunteer scientists and expert contributors from across the nation. The process involves multiple reviews by 14 federal agencies and a public comment period. Oversight is provided by the Global Change Research Program, a federal entity established by Congress in 1990, with support from NASA.

During the Trump administration, this process faced significant upheaval. Recently, NASA terminated its major partnership with ICF International, a consulting firm that supplied much of the technical support and staffing for the Global Change Research Program, which coordinates the contributions from numerous sources.

President Trump has consistently downplayed the risks associated with global warming. Russell Vert, the current head of the Office of Management and Budget, noted in a pre-election document that the next president should “reorganize” the global change research program, as scientific reports on climate change were often utilized in environmental litigation that restricted federal actions.

Vought advocated for the separation of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the agency responsible for the government’s largest climate research unit, termed the “climate warning.”

During Trump’s first term, the administration made efforts to undermine the national climate assessment. When the 2018 report was released, which found that global warming posed an imminent and catastrophic threat, the administration published it the day after Thanksgiving to lessen its impact.

In February, scientists submitted a comprehensive summary of the upcoming assessment to the White House for initial review; however, that review has been halted, and the agency’s comment period has been delayed.

It remains uncertain what will happen next with the assessment, which is still mandated by Congress. Some scientists worry that the administration may attempt to draft an entirely new report from scratch, potentially downplaying the dangers of rising temperatures and contradicting established climate science.

“These are the most effective strategies to assist us,” said Mead Crosby, a senior scientist in the Climate Impact Group at the University of Washington, who has contributed to the assessment. “The real question is whether it accurately reflects reliable science and has a tangible impact on our community in preparing for climate change.”

Scientists previously involved in climate assessments assert that the report is crucial for understanding the effects of climate change on daily life in the United States.

Catherine Hayho, a climate scientist at Texas Tech, stated this month, “we are considering that global issue and making it more relevant to us.” “If you care about food, water, transportation, insurance, or health, this is what climate change signifies for residents in the Southwest or the Great Plains. That’s the importance.”

Numerous state and local policymakers, along with private companies, depend on these assessments to comprehend how climate change impacts various regions of the United States and how they can adapt accordingly.

While the scientific understanding of climate change and its repercussions has not dramatically shifted since the last assessment in 2023, Dr. Keenan from Tulane noted that research is continuously advancing regarding what communities can do to mitigate rising sea levels and other issues exacerbated by increasing temperatures.

Scientists indicated that decision-makers responsible for the final assessment would likely rely on outdated information regarding effective adaptations and mitigation measures.

“We risk losing our fundamental report, which is intended to communicate the dangers of climate change and propose advancements,” stated Dustin Mulbany, an environmental studies professor and author at San Jose State University. “That would be quite devastating.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

FBI arrests Wisconsin judge in immigration dispute during Trump Administration live update

Posted on April 25, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

On March 11, approximately 50 judges gathered in Washington for a six-month meeting of the Judicial Council, which oversees the administration of federal courts. This meeting marked the first gathering since President Trump assumed office.

Discussions during the meeting focused on staffing levels, long-term planning, and the increasing threats to judges and their safety, according to attendees.

At one session, Judge Richard J. Sullivan, chairman of the conference’s Judicial Security Committee, raised concerns about potential threats to the safety of judges. He highlighted the authority that the US Marshals Service, overseen by the Justice Department, has in judicial security matters. Given the history of former officials like Mike Pompeo and John Bolton having their security stripped by Trump, Judge Sullivan wondered if federal judges could be the next target.

Judge Sullivan, who was appointed by President George W. Bush and later elevated to appeals judge by Trump, emphasized the importance of trusting the head of judicial security amidst uncertainties about potential threats to the federal bench.

While there is no evidence that Trump is considering revoking judges’ security, Judge Sullivan’s remarks highlighted the unease among judges about the agency responsible for their safety ultimately answering to the President through the Attorney General, without sufficient funding to address rising threats.

In a statement, the Marshall Services affirmed their commitment to following all legal orders from federal courts to ensure the protection of judges, jurors, and witnesses. However, concerns have been raised about the frozen court security funds at a time when threats to federal judges are on the rise.

Judge Robert J. Conrad Jr., in a letter to Congress, expressed disappointment that court security funds remain stagnant despite the escalating threats. The total amount spent has seen minimal increase, despite inflation and higher staff salaries.

The former US S’s responsibilities have expanded to include protecting the Supreme Court’s residence in response to growing threats. Concerns about the oversight of Marshall Services have led some to propose transferring control of the agency to the judiciary for better protection of judges.

As the threats to judges continue to increase, some members of Congress are considering legislation to make judicial security more independent. The former US S’s response to court orders and the potential interference from political branches remain critical issues to address for the safety of judges.

Despite the challenges, efforts to reduce Marshall Services to increase efficiency may impact the agency’s ability to fulfill its crucial mission of protecting judges and upholding court orders.

Source: www.nytimes.com

New US Tariffs: Smartphones and Computers Exempted from China by Trump Administration

Posted on April 12, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Following more than a week of tariffs on Chinese imports, the Trump administration released new rules on Friday that exempted smartphones, computers, semiconductors, and other electronic devices from certain fees. This move significantly lowered prices for high-tech companies like Apple and Dell, as well as benefiting consumers who purchase products like iPhones.

A message was issued by US Customs and Border Protection on Friday, listing the products that had previously been subjected to tariffs on Chinese goods. Certain exclusions were granted for modems, routers, flash drives, and other tech products not commonly manufactured in the US.

The exemption does not completely eliminate tariffs on electronic devices and smartphones. The administration previously imposed a 20% tariff on Chinese goods due to concerns about the country’s involvement in fentanyl trade. Additionally, tariffs on semiconductors, crucial components in electronic devices, are expected to increase.

This exemption marks a significant development in the ongoing trade war with China and is expected to have far-reaching effects on the US economy. Tech giants like Apple and Nvidia will benefit from avoiding heavy taxes that could have impacted their profits. Consumers rushed to purchase iPhones to avoid potential price hikes, relieving concerns about inflation and economic instability.

While the tariff relief provides temporary respite for the tech industry, the Trump administration has indicated plans for further trade investigations, particularly targeting semiconductors. The aim is to secure the US supply chain for vital technologies used in various products, including smartphones and automobiles.

President Trump’s shift in trade policy has implications for various industries, especially as it relates to China. The tech sector, in particular, has closely engaged with the administration to navigate the changing landscape of tariffs and taxes on imports. Apple CEO Tim Cook has been instrumental in lobbying for exemptions and advocating for US manufacturing of tech products.

As the trade tensions continue to evolve, the tech industry remains a focal point in the US-China trade relationship. Consumers may see fluctuations in prices for electronic devices as the two countries negotiate their trade terms.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump administration postpones restrictions on costly bandages

Posted on April 12, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration announced Friday that it would delay the implementation of Biden-era rules intended to limit coverage of unproven, costly bandages known as skin substitutes.

The policy will be It’s late until 2026 allowing businesses to take advantage of the loopholes in Medicare rules to continue to set higher prices for new products. The New York Times reported Thursday that businesses are selling these bandages to doctors at discounted prices, while doctors are charging Medicare for the price of full stickers and pocketing the differences.

According to an analysis conducted by Earty Read, an actuarial company that assesses the costs of large healthcare companies, Medicare spending has skyrocketed above $10 billion from $1.6 billion in 2024. Some experts said bandage spending is one of the biggest examples of waste in the history of Medicare, an insurance program for the elderly.

The Super PAC for President Trump’s election campaign received a $2 million donation from Extreme Care, a leading seller of skin alternatives. Trump has criticised his social media policy twice, saying it hurts patients who use the product with diabetic pain.

“‘Crooked Joe’ has broken through policies that will lead to more suffering and death for Medicare diabetics,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in March.

Extremity care also criticized the plan, claiming it would disrupt the supply chain, eliminate innovation and increase costs for both doctors and patients. The company says it complies with high ethical standards, but did not respond immediately to requests for comment regarding the new delay in the policy.

Over 120 skin alternatives are on the market. They average an average of $5,089 per square inch, with the most expensive time exceeding $23,000.

Biden-era rules would have limited Medicare coverage for a small subset of products that have been shown to be effective in randomized clinical trials. The new policy will be applied to patients using ulcer and leg pain bandages known as ulcers. This can be caused by diabetes or poor circulation.

Medicare said in a Friday’s Statement It will consider policies as part of the transition to a new administration. During that time, he said, “We believe it is important to maintain patient access to skin replacement products with quality evidence of effectiveness.”

Mass Coalition, a group supporting the skin substitute industry, said it was “satisfied” with the delay. Public relations officer Preya Nonona Pinto said the group is looking forward to working with Medicare on “coverage policies and payment reforms that guarantee access to skin replacements.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

Researchers claim the Trump administration has initiated a battle against science

Posted on April 1, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Approximately 1,900 leading researchers have denounced the Trump administration Open Letter On Monday, it conducted a “wholesale assault on National Science” that could backtrack research for decades, threatening the health and safety of Americans.

All signatories of the letter were warned by the damages caused by layoffs in health and science institutions, all elected members of the National Academy of Science, Engineering and Medicine, and by the cuts and delays in funding that have historically supported research within government and across American universities.

“For over 80 years, wise investments by the US government have built up national research companies and are a global hope,” the letter states. “Amazingly, the Trump administration is destabilizing the company by stripping funds for research, firing thousands of scientists, removing public access to scientific data, and pressures researchers to change or abandon their work on ideological basis.”

The letter stated that many universities and research institutes have so far “became antagonistic to the administration and remained silent in order to put their funds at risk.” However, he said, “The country’s scientific enterprises are undoubtedly undoubtedly.”

The signatories urged Americans to appeal to Congress to protect scientific funds.

With Elon Musk’s efforts to cut spending on institutions he considers as ideological enemies and President Trump’s crackdown, the administration has sought to dismantle some of the federal government’s scientific fundraising equipment.

Funding from the National Institutes of Health, which supports jobs by more than 300,000 scientists across the country, has down billions of dollars from typical levels in the early months of the Trump administration.

The White House has also moved to cancel research in certain areas, including transgender health and climate science.

The Trump administration announced last week that it had fired 10,000 Health and Human Services Department employees as part of a broader restructuring that reflects the priorities of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The department hired unreliable vaccine skeptics to study the links that have been exposed by scientists for a long time between vaccines and autism. On Friday, the country’s top vaccine regulator resigned, citing Kennedy’s “misinformation and lies.”

Over the past few weeks, members of the National Academy of Medicine, a nonprofit that provides independent health policy advice, have begun discussing concerns with members of the National Academy of Science and Engineering.

Dr. Stephen Wolf, the organizer of the letter studying health policy at the Federal University of Virginia, said the conversations produced open letters.

The letter was drafted by a group of 13 scientists representing fields such as medicine, climate science, sociology and economics.

“We know what this does to the US life expectancy, mortality rates and the mental health crisis we have,” Dr. Wolf said. “These changes in research companies are going to lead to harm to everyday Americans.”

Dr. Wolf cited the planned reorganization of the Agency for Medical Research and Quality, a small institution responsible for protecting patient safety and ensuring Americans’ access to free preventive services like mammograms.

“The person responsible for protecting the quality of healthcare in the United States has just been demolished,” Dr. Wolf said.

The letter outlines the results of funding cuts, including a pause in research studies, faculty layoffs, and reduced enrollment of graduate students.

It also condemns the management of “censorship involvement” among other things by “blocking research on topics that appear undesirable, such as climate change, or topics that have unfavorable outcomes on topics from vaccine safety to economic trends.”

Source: www.nytimes.com

European sales of Tesla drop by almost 45% amid controversy over Trump administration and masks

Posted on March 25, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Sales of a new Tesla car in Europe plummeted last month since Elon Musk’s involvement in Trump’s administration, indicating potential buyer backlash towards his controversial behavior.

The electric car manufacturer sold just under 16,000 vehicles in Europe last month, a 44% decrease across 25 countries including the EU, the UK, Norway, and Switzerland.

Tesla’s market share dropped to 9.6%, its lowest in five years. January also saw a 45% decline in sales compared to 2024.

Although the UK reported a 21% increase in new Tesla vehicle registrations in February, Tesla’s overall sales in Europe are struggling due to Musk’s political involvement and the Model Y overhaul.

Analysts are monitoring Musk’s impact on Tesla amidst concerns of consumer backlash and competition within the EV market. Brands like Tesla, with limited model lineups, are vulnerable during model transitions.

Other automakers like Volkswagen, BMW, and Mini have seen sales growth in Europe, outpacing Tesla in February.

BYD, a Chinese-owned company, has reported significant sales increases, overshadowing Tesla in revenue and sales figures.

Skip past newsletter promotions

BYD has emerged as a strong competitor to Tesla, exceeding them in revenue and sales volume, especially with their line of hybrid cars.

Polestar, owned by Geely, Volvo’s parent company, has also shown growth in vehicle sales in the European market.

BYD’s market value has surged, positioning them as a key player in the electric vehicle industry alongside Tesla and other major automakers.

Despite these challenges, Tesla’s shares rose 6% on Monday, showing resilience in the market amid increasing competition and regulatory changes.

Overall car sales in European markets saw a slight drop, while BEV registrations rose significantly, indicating a shift towards electric vehicles in the region.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Trump administration postpones regulations for companies to monitor contaminated food

Posted on March 23, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday Requirements are delayed by 30 months Its food companies and grocery stores quickly track and pull contaminated food through their supply chains and pull them off the shelf.

The rule, which aimed to “limit food-borne illness and death,” required businesses and individuals to maintain a better record to identify where food was cultivated, packed, processed and produced. It is expected to come into effect in January 2026 as part of the groundbreaking food safety law passed in 2011, and progressed during President Trump’s first term.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has shown interest in food chemical safety, moving to ban food dyes and making public debuts that people can move to ban food dyes. Track toxins in food. However, other actions in the Trump administration’s first months have undermined efforts to tackle the bacteria and other contaminants of diseased food. The administration cut its way through the company closed down jobs for major food safety commissions, frozen scientists’ credit card spending, and routine testing was conducted to detect food pathogens.

In recent years, there have been several well-known outbreaks, including cases related to last year’s fatal listeria of wild boar headmeat and E. coli in the onion of MacDonald’s quarter pounders.

The postponement issued an alarm among several advocacy groups on Thursday.

“The decision is extremely disappointing and consumers are at risk of getting sick with unsafe foods as small segments of the industry are seeking delays despite their 15 years of preparation,” said Brian Ronholm, Food Policy Director for the Advocacy Group’s Consumer Report.

Many retailers have already taken steps to adhere to the rules. Still, food industry trade groups lobbyed to delay the implementation of the December regulations. To the Los Angeles Times.

In a letter to President Trump in December, food manufacturers and other corporate trade groups cited many regulations that they said were “strangled our economy.” They asked Food traceability rules stored and delayed.

“This is a huge step towards food safety,” said Sarah Sosher, director of regulatory affairs at the advocacy group, Science Center for the Public Interest. “The surprising thing about that is that this was a bipartisan rule.”

Sosher said there is widespread support for the measure to protect consumers and businesses.

Source: www.nytimes.com

CEO of Crypto Giant Tether denies suspicion while collaborating with the Trump Administration in Cryptocurrency dealings

Posted on March 7, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Last week, Paolo Ardoino, CEO of Tether, a cryptocurrency company, traveled through Switzerland contemplating regulatory changes. Tether, once at odds with the establishment, now operates smoothly.

Since Tether is the world’s most traded cryptocurrency, its journey has been unconventional, facing regulatory hurdles and investigations. Despite challenges from regulators, Tether continues to maintain its value pegged to the dollar.

Aldoino, the CEO of Tether, believes that his leadership needs to adapt to global dynamics to sustain the company’s operations.

Tether, holding significant amounts of US government debt, plays a crucial role in the cryptocurrency market, supporting users in unstable economies and providing a secure asset for traders.

Despite past struggles with regulators, Tether now embraces transparency and aims to collaborate with law enforcement agencies to improve its standing in the industry.

Regarding criticisms and regulatory challenges, Aldoino admits past naivety and stresses the importance of communication to build trust and transparency.

The relationship between Tether and Cantor Fitzgerald, a custodian, plays a vital role in the company’s operations, despite challenges posed by regulatory scrutiny.

Lutnick, confirmed as the Secretary of Commerce under the Trump administration, holds a significant impact on Tether’s future collaborations with the US government.

Issues around auditing and compliance continue to surface within the cryptocurrency industry, with Tether facing questions about the stability of its stablecoin and regulatory compliance.

Aldoino warns of potential threats from regulatory challenges in the US and Europe, emphasizing the importance of regulatory clarity moving forward.

In conclusion, Aldoino sees the evolving landscape of cryptocurrency regulation as a critical factor in shaping Tether’s future, pushing for a more supportive regulatory environment starting in September.

Source: www.theguardian.com

US national security at risk as Trump administration fails to effectively address Russia’s cyber threat

Posted on March 1, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has publicly stated that Russia is not considered a cyber threat to US national security or critical infrastructure, marking a significant departure from previous assessments.

Experts warn that this policy shift could leave the US vulnerable to Russian hacking attacks and may signal warming relations between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Recent incidents indicate that the US no longer views Russia as a cybersecurity threat.

Liesyl Franz, the State Department’s deputy director of international cybersecurity, did not mention Russia as a threat in her recent speech before the UN Working Group on Cybersecurity. This contrasts with statements from European Union and UK officials who highlighted the threat posed by Moscow.

US policy changes regarding cybersecurity have been made behind closed doors, with new directives focusing on China and neglecting to mention Russia.

Anonymous sources familiar with the matter have expressed concern that the US is ignoring the Russian cyber threat, which was previously a primary focus for agencies like the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

Reports indicate that CISA officials have been reassigned, raising questions about the US government’s approach to protecting against cyber threats from Russia.

The New York Times reported that CISA officials tasked with safeguarding elections from cyberattacks have also been reassigned.

Concerns have been raised about the shift in US policy towards Russia, as many believe that Russia remains a significant cyber threat to US interests.

The CISA and State Department have not provided comments on these developments.

The change in US policy regarding Russia’s cyber threat is seen as a departure from previous assessments and has raised concerns among experts.

For over a quarter-century, Putin’s Russia has been active in cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns, posing a challenge to the international order.

If you have any tips about this story, you can reach out to us at +1 646 886 8761 on Signal

Source: www.theguardian.com

#Altgov: Covert Coalition of Government Employees Fighting Against Doge from Within the Trump Administration

Posted on February 26, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

aA post from Elon Musk on Saturday afternoon requested that federal employees list five things from the previous week related to emails. This request was expected to reach the inboxes of 2.3 million federal employees, sparking discussions among a secret network of government workers and contractors. These individuals began communicating through an encrypted app to coordinate their responses.

Employees on a 10-hour, four-day schedule did not see the email until Tuesday, missing the deadline for responses. Some employees even added a humorous touch, with one worker joking, “Bonus points to those who say they spent government subsidies on hookers and blows.”

After quickly deliberating, the network agreed on a response strategy. They decided to split the oaths sworn by federal employees into five bullet points, which would be sent back via email. The first point was: “I supported and defended the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Another oath included: “I’ve pledged true faith and loyalty to the same thing.” According to veteran contractor Lynn Stahl, these efforts aimed to expose harmful policies, defend public institutions, and provide citizens with necessary information and support.

Identifying themselves as #Altgov, the network gained visibility with multiple social media accounts, most adopting names or initials of federal agencies. Their goal was to shed light on the chaos caused by the previous administration and combat misinformation.

With around 40 accounts and growing followership, #Altgov engaged in subgroups for information sharing and strategy development using the encrypted messaging app, Wire.

A post from #ALTGOV explaining the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Photo: alt cdc (they/them)/bluesky

The origin of #Altgov dates back to the first Trump administration, with notable accounts like “Alt National Park Service” gaining traction on Twitter. The network evolved to serve the public by coordinating relief efforts and distributing resources during crises.

Transitioning their presence to Bluesky, #Altgov continued their mission to provide value where the government fell short. They expanded their reach by forming new accounts dedicated to specific agencies, like #Altgov FEMA, which focused on disaster response.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Federal employees who joined #Altgov expressed a sense of duty and a desire for transparency in government actions. By uncovering misinformation and providing accurate information, they aimed to empower citizens and hold institutions accountable.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Britain postpones AI regulation as ministers aim to align with Trump administration

Posted on February 26, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

Ministers have postponed the regulation of artificial intelligence in line with the Trump administration, as reported by The Guardian.

Three labor sources revealed that the AI bill, originally planned for release before Christmas, is now expected to be delayed until summer.

The Minister had intended to issue concise invoices shortly after taking office.

The bill aims to address concerns about the potential risks of advanced AI models to humanity and to clarify the use of copyrighted materials by AI companies, differing from individual suggestions.

However, Trump’s election prompted a reconsideration of the bill. Senior labor sources said the bill was being carefully reconsidered, and there are no firm proposals yet on its content. The source added that they had aimed to pass it before Christmas, but it is now delayed until summer.

Another labor source, familiar with the legislation, mentioned that earlier drafts of the bill had been prepared months ago, but they are now being held back due to Trump’s actions, which could negatively impact British businesses. They expressed reluctance to proceed without addressing these concerns.

Trump’s actions have undermined Biden’s plans for AI regulation, including revoking an executive order aimed at ensuring technology safety and reliability. The future of the US AI Safety Institute is uncertain following the resignation of its director. Additionally, US Vice President JD Vance opposed planned European technical regulations at the AI Summit in Paris.

The UK government opted to align with the US by not signing the Paris Declaration endorsed by 66 other countries at the summit. UK Ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson reportedly proposed making the UK a major US AI investment hub.

During a December committee meeting, Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle hinted that the AI bill was in advanced stages. However, Science Minister Patrick Balance stated earlier this month that there is no bill currently in place.

A government spokesperson stated, “This government remains committed to enacting legislation that will ensure the safe realization of the significant benefits of AI for years to come.

“We are actively engaged in refining our proposals for publication soon to ensure an effective approach against this rapidly evolving technology. Consultations will soon commence.”

The Minister faces pressure regarding individualized plans to allow AI companies access to online materials, including creative works for training models without requiring copyright permission.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Artists like Paul McCartney and Elton John have criticized this move, warning that it could undermine traditional copyright laws protecting artists’ livelihoods.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Concerns rise over potential Trump administration use of Israeli spyware amid abuse allegations

Posted on February 11, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

WhatsApp recently won a legal battle against NSO Group, an Israeli cyberwareponds manufacturer. Despite this victory, a new threat has emerged from another company, Paragon Solutions, which is also based in Israel, including the United States.

In January, WhatsApp revealed that 90 users, including journalists and civil society members, were targeted by SPYware created by Paragon Solutions last year. This raises concerns about how Paragon’s government clients utilize hacking tools.

Among the targeted individuals were Italian journalist Francesco Cancerato, immigrant support NGO founder Luca Casarini, and Libyan activist Husam El Gomati. University of Toronto researchers, who work closely with WhatsApp, plan to release a technical report on the breach.

Paragon, like NSO Group, provides spyware to government agencies. The spyware, known as Graphite, allows for hacking without the user’s knowledge, granting access to photos and encrypted messages. Paragon claims its use aligns with US policies for national security missions.

Paragon stated a zero-tolerance policy for violations and terminated contracts with Italy after breaching terms. David Kay, a former special rapporteur, described the marketing of such surveillance products as an abuse and a threat to the rule of law.

The issue has relevance in the US, where the Biden administration blacklisted NSO in 2021 due to reports of abuse. A contract between ICE and Paragon was suspended after concerns were raised about spyware use.

Paragon assures compliance with US laws and regulations, following the Biden executive order. The company, now US-owned, has a subsidiary in Virginia. Concerns remain about potential misuse against political opponents.

Experts from Citizen Lab and Amnestytech are vigilant in detecting illegal surveillance in democracies worldwide.

Source: www.theguardian.com

22 states sue Trump administration for cutting funding to research projects

Posted on February 10, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

A lawsuit was filed by 22 state attorney generals on Monday. They opposed the Trump administration’s decision to cut research funding by restricting how universities and research institutions are reimbursed for “indirect costs.”

The lawsuit names both the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services as Defendants, stating that the impact of the changes in indirect rates announced on Friday would be “immediate and catastrophic.”

NIH revealed on Friday that it will cap indirect funding for research projects at 15% and significantly decrease the federal government’s funding for research institutions for equipment, maintenance, utilities, support staff, and more. Previously, these rates were negotiated with the agencies. The new policy took effect on Monday for all new and existing NIH grants.

The lawsuit, filed on Monday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts and led by the attorney generals of Illinois and Michigan, alleges that the NIH violated the Administrative Procedure Act and disregarded the will of Congress, which aimed to prevent changes in indirect cost rates since 2018.

All Democratic state Attorneys General are part of this lawsuit.

The lawsuit demands a temporary restraining order and an injunction to prevent the NIH from implementing the new rules.

Scientists have warned that reducing indirect costs will negatively impact research efforts, hinder basic science research, and potentially impede disease research and new discoveries.

In response to the proposed changes, the University of California System stated that this will significantly reduce personnel and services, affecting education, training, patient care, basic research, and clinical trials.

Supporters of the NIH policy change argue that indirect costs are currently excessive and need to be controlled.

According to a Friday post by x, Katie Miller from the newly formed Government Efficiency Bureau, or Doge, stated: “This will reduce Harvard’s exorbitant costs by $150 million annually.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

$5 billion Electric Vehicle Charging Program Suspended by Trump Administration

Posted on February 8, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

The Trump administration has directed US states to halt the $5 billion electric vehicle charging station program, dealing another blow to the environmental movement since the president’s return to the White House.

In a notice issued on Thursday, the Federal Highways Agency (FHWA) of the Transportation Agency ordered states not to utilize funds allocated under the Biden administration’s National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program.

Emily Biondi, assistant manager of planning, environment, and real estate at FHWA, wrote in a memo, “The new leadership of the Department of Transportation has chosen to reassess the policies guiding the implementation of the NEVI Formula Program.” Biondi added, “Therefore, the current NEVI Formula Program Guidance dated June 11, 2024, supersedes all previous versions of this guidance.”

Biondi further stated, “As a consequence of the withdrawal of guidance for the NEVI Formula Program, FHWA has ceased immediately the approval of all plans for electric vehicle infrastructure deployment in all states. Therefore, the updated final NEVI Formula Program is effective immediately. No new obligations will be incurred under the NEVI Formula Program until new guidance is issued and new state plans are submitted and approved.”

Biondi mentioned that existing obligations for the design and construction of charging stations will be reimbursed to prevent disruption in current financial commitments until new guidance is issued.

According to the page on the Energy Department website, the NEVI program funds states to strategically deploy EV chargers, covering up to 80% of qualified project costs.

In a report by Politico on Thursday, FHWA has removed several website pages containing information about the NEVI program.

Andrew Rogers, a former FHWA administrator under the Biden administration, stated to Politico that the memo “appears to disregard federal court rulings and multiple injunctions.”

Currently, 14 states have operational EV stations, as reported by EV Clearing House. As of November last year, there was an 83% increase in open NEVI ports from the previous quarter, with 126 public charging ports at 31 NEVI stations in nine states.

Skip past newsletter promotions

A total of 41 states have released solicitations for EV charging stations, with over 3,560 fast charging ports at more than 890 locations.

During his campaign, Trump opposed EVs, suggesting that EV supporters should “rot in hell” and that Biden’s backing of EVs would lead to a “bloodbath” in the US automotive industry.

One of the executive orders Trump signed shortly after taking office aimed to ensure that half of all new vehicles for sale in the US between 2021 and 2030 would be revoked.

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Trump administration: A look at the wealthiest person in the world and their impact on the US government

Posted on February 4, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

sInse declared the support of Donald Trump in July last year, then spent more than $ 250 million in re-election efforts, and Eron Musk rapidly had a political impact, and is located at the center of the new administration. I am doing it. At present, as the president himself, the mask has begun to use its power, has made a decision that can affect the health of millions of people, and gains access to very sensitive personal data. I am attacking those who oppose him. Musk, the wealthy man in the world and an unrivaled official, has gained surprising levels of the federal government.

On the weekend, workers with the mask “government efficiency” (DOGE) collide with public servants on the demands of free access to the major government agencies of the US government agency in a series of violent series of conflicts. I did. When the dust settled down, several high -ranking officials opposed to the acquisition were pushed out, and Musuk’s allies had controlled.

Masks, which have been supported by Trump, are currently working to close the US International Development Organization (USAID). He boasted on Sunday to “supply USAID to the wood chipper.” He also targeted several other institutions in purs an aggressive attempt to purify and remake the federal government along the border of ideology, avoiding the parliament or justice monitoring.

Most of the Musuk’s actions were carried out, with thousands of people hired by the USAID -like institutions he did without moving forward, transparency, and transparency. Humanitative organizations that depend on US financing The operation has been stopped And the staff fired the staff while the government workers were closed out of their office. He operates DOGE as an unofficial government division without a mission approved by Congress. Hold the position “Special government staff” Side step financial disclosure And the public examination process.

The USAID employee protests outside the headquarters on Monday in Washington. Photo: KEVIN DIETSCH/Getty Images

Source: www.theguardian.com

President Trump signs executive order lifting ban on TikTok in the US | Trump administration

Posted on January 21, 2025 by Igor Mitreski

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order suspending sales of Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok, as mandated by a law passed in the United States last year.

Trump’s order was part of a series of actions he took on his first day back in the White House. The order instructed President Trump’s attorney general to hold off on enforcing a law that would require the sale or closure of major social media apps in the U.S. for 75 days.

The moratorium allows for a careful consideration of the next steps in a way that protects national security and avoids an abrupt shutdown of platforms used by millions of Americans.

Additionally, the order directs the Department of Justice to inform other tech giants like Apple, Google, and Oracle, who have ties to TikTok, that they will not be penalized for any actions during this period.

When asked about the purpose of the TikTok executive order, President Trump stated that it gives the government the option to sell or shut down the platform, but a decision on the course of action has not been made yet.

Critics of the video-sharing platform argue that it poses a security threat because it is owned by ByteDance, a company with ties to the Chinese government. They fear that the personal information of U.S. users could be used for malicious purposes.

During his presidency, Trump had previously criticized TikTok for these reasons and attempted to ban it. However, he has since shifted his stance due to various factors, including his popularity on the platform and the views of TikTok investor Jeff Yass.

Despite Trump’s change in position, Congressional Republicans have remained firm, and under bipartisan legislation signed by President Biden, TikTok was required to sell its assets to a U.S.-based company by January 19, with a possible 90-day extension for the sale process.”

Plans to sell TikTok have not been confirmed, but there is interest from figures like Frank McCourt and Kevin O’Leary. The U.S. Supreme Court has been involved in the matter, and despite objections from free speech advocates, the law remains in effect.

Trump’s court filing emphasizes his unique ability to negotiate a solution that addresses national security concerns while preserving the platform, but experts question the effectiveness of his approach.

Alan Rosenstein, a former National Security Adviser, dismissed the executive order as merely a symbolic gesture and stated that TikTok would likely remain banned despite Trump’s intentions.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Environmental organizations gear up to combat incoming Trump administration

Posted on November 22, 2024 by Igor Mitreski

overview

Environmental groups are gearing up to resist the anticipated policy changes from the incoming Trump administration.
They foresee President Trump expanding oil and gas drilling and attempting to undo or scale back some of the legislation passed during Biden’s presidency.
Environmental groups are bracing for legal battles ahead and are seeking donations to support their efforts.

Environmental groups are preparing for pushback against the upcoming Trump administration, expecting swift policy changes compared to when Donald Trump took office in 2017.

Based on Trump’s past actions and recent campaign comments, experts predict that he will expand oil and gas drilling, reduce land conservation efforts, and possibly aim to reverse Biden-era legislation like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Curbing Inflation Act.

Environmentalists are concerned about Trump’s Cabinet picks, who are likely to support increased drilling activities as per Trump’s statements. Legal battles are on the horizon, with groups like the Center for Biological Diversity gearing up for potential fights against unlawful changes.

The Brookings Institution reported that Trump’s first administration made around 74 moves that were seen as detrimental to environmental policies, a number that might rise in the next term given Trump’s promise to change regulations significantly.

Environmental groups like NRDC and the Center for Biological Diversity are readying themselves for legal disputes and are actively seeking donations to fund their fight against expected environmental policy changes.

Trump’s transition team has not provided any comments on the matter.

Both NRDC and the Center for Biological Diversity have a track record of successfully challenging Trump’s policies in court, winning a significant percentage of the cases they engaged in.

Conservation groups are anticipating conflicts over protected federal lands, particularly in the Southwest, with past battles over Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah serving as examples of potential future clashes.

The sun sets over Monument Valley in the distance, seen from Bears Ears National Monument outside Blanding, Utah, in 2021.George Fry/Getty Images File

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Biden administration allocates $623 million to enhance electric vehicle charging infrastructure, White House reports

Posted on January 11, 2024 by Igor Mitreski

President Joe Biden’s administration has announced $623 million in funding to increase electric vehicle charging points in the U.S. amid concerns that the transition to zero-carbon transportation is not keeping pace with goals to tackle the climate crisis.

The money will be distributed as grants to dozens of programs across 22 states, including EV chargers for multifamily housing in New Jersey, fast chargers in Oregon, and hydrogen fuel chargers for cargo trucks in Texas. In total, funds pulled from the bipartisan infrastructure law are expected to add his 7,500 chargers across the United States.

“We’re building the charging network to win the EV race,” said U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg.

“The electric vehicle revolution is not coming, it is here. I very personally recognize the importance of the fact that America led the world in the automobile revolution. We’re in the middle of a second automotive revolution, and it’s important that America has one again.”

There are about 170,000 electric vehicle chargers in the U.S., a significant increase from a network that was nearly invisible before Biden took office, and the White House is helping the transition away from gasoline and diesel vehicles. The company has set a goal of selling 500,000 chargers.

Biden’s climate change adviser, Ali Zaidi, said that “America is leading the way globally on electric vehicles” and that the U.S. is on track to “meet and exceed” the administration’s charger goals. He said there was. He added: “This expansion will continue over the coming years and decades until we reach net zero in the transport sector.”

Sales of electric vehicles are growing in the United States, with more than 1 million EVs sold for the first time last year, accounting for 9% of all car sales. But that rate of growth has slowed somewhat, with companies like Ford, General Motors and even Tesla scaling back their EV ambitions in recent months.

U.S. motorists are faced with an ever-expanding selection of EVs, but most are still more expensive than their gasoline equivalents, meaning they are out of reach for many buyers. research has discovered The median household income for EV buyers is $186,000.

Research shows that nearly one-third of potential EV buyers discount their purchase due to lack of charging infrastructure, despite accounting for most of the total vehicle trips in the United States. Masu. 3 miles or less. Even if Biden’s goal of 500,000 chargers is met, this is far fewer than is needed to support a gradual transition away from polluting cars. Estimate It is predicted that more than 28 million chargers will be needed by 2030.

Skip past newsletter promotions

“In the U.S., EV penetration is growing at almost twice the rate of charger installations,” said Brent Gruber, executive director of J.D. Power’s electric vehicle business. said last year. “Construction of new charging stations is not keeping up with demand.”

Earlier this week, the Environmental Protection Agency announced nearly $1 billion in grants to replace diesel-powered school buses with electric and low-emission vehicles. EPA will disburse the funds to 280 school districts serving 7 million children nationwide. Charging infrastructure is also an issue in efforts to phase out diesel buses.

Source: www.theguardian.com