How NOAA’s reduction in cutting methods impacts weather forecasting reliability

A devastating tornado near Minden, Iowa in April 2024

Jonah Lange/Getty Images

Wide range of firing and staffing changes at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) could reduce the reliability of the country's weather forecasts, according to several researchers and the American Meteorological Association.

“The consequences for Americans will be vastly broad, including increasing vulnerability to dangerous weather,” the organization states: statement.

More than 880 NOAA employees have been fired under President Donald Trump's control. statement From US Senator Maria Cantwell. This includes researchers working to improve hurricane predictions and build next-generation weather models, as well as more than 200 people within the National Weather Service, part of NOAA. According to two former NOAA employees, another 500 people accepted an offer to resign from their previous “Folk in the Road” offer, and shouted more for the agency.

A NOAA spokesman declined to discuss shootings and staffing changes. They said the agency will “continue to provide weather information, forecasts and warnings based on our public safety mission.” However, external researchers and former NOAA employees say the cuts could reduce the quality of the agency's weather forecasts.

The change states, “it has a clear cascade effect that affects predictions, even what people are watching on the phone via third parties.” Kari Bowen University of Colorado at Boulder University.

Cuts can quickly affect alerts about extreme weather like tornadoes and hurricanes, and in the long run, even commercial weather apps rely on modeling from NOAA, allowing general weather reports to be more accurate. Below are four ways experts can predict a shooting storm, and four ways that resignation can affect weather forecasts.

Delayed Tornado Warning

National Weather Service operates a network of 122 weather forecasting offices nationwide. At least 16 offices in the central part of the country's prone to tornadoes are currently understaffed. William Galls At Iowa State University. A former NOAA employee said that over 12 offices in the central region have resigned from head meteorologists. And then the harsh weather season begins in the region.

Nearby offices may be able to help understaffed sites track and alert tornadoes, but confusion can lead to delays. “There's a good chance there's a lot of mistakes,” Gallus says.

Such delays were evident last year when a tornado evacuated local forecast offices in Iowa, Galls said. An adjacent station intervened to track the storm. But amidst the chaos, some residents received five minutes of warning that the tornado was heading their path, rather than the minimum 15 minutes that the forecaster aims to provide. In an emergency, these lost times can make a difference whether they can reach safely.

I don't know when a hurricane suddenly becomes stronger

Some employees fired from NOAA were working to improve hurricane forecasts. In particular, we estimate the time when the situation will rapidly intensify. Rapid strengthening can make hurricanes even more dangerous by reducing the time people prepare. However, these events are well known for predicting.

Hurricane modelers at NOAA and other agencies have made great strides in predicting rapid strengthening in recent years, says Brian Tan At Albany University in New York. This is due to improved modeling, data collection and data integration efforts by NOAA researchers. Currently, personnel delivery “destabilizes the entire process of improving hurricane track and intensity prediction,” he says.

“It will be slower to promote the improvements we have been expecting to improve hurricane forecasts over the past 30 years.” Andy Hazeltonworking on improving NOAA's hurricane forecasts before being fired from its position at the agency's environmental modelling centre last week. He says several people have been fired from a group of “Hurricane Hunters” that fly planes into the storm to collect data, including two flight supervisors.

Unreliable weather data

Accurate weather forecasts rely on a continuous stream of information about real-time conditions around the world, collected from marine buoys, satellites, radars and other sensors. Data will then be fed into global weather models that underlie both public and private forecasts. Much of the world's data and modeling is provided by NOAA.

Staff reductions could impact these critical data collection efforts and would reduce the quality of forecasts. In fact, some locals Weather Forecast Center Due to a lack of staff, regular balloon launches have already been suspended.

“All of these observation networks are maintained and run by people.” Emily Becker At the University of Miami in Florida. “And we've already lost a lot of people from those teams. That's going to be an aggregate effect.”

Improvements to future weather forecasts have stopped

At least eight people, a quarter of the staff, were fired from the Environmental Modeling Center. This is responsible for verifying weather data and integrating it into a model that is more or less underlying all predictions, says Hazelton. “What is the temperature this weekend?” and everything is “Are there any tornadoes?”

Personnel delivery at the Environmental Modeling Center will slow research to improve current global weather models, he says. Additionally, 10 people have been fired from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Institute, which researchers were building. Next Generation Global weather and climate models.

Such reductions are “very harmful” to efforts to make forecasts more reliable, Gallus says. He says that almost every improvement in forecasts over the past decades depends on improvements in modeling. “If we're losing a ton of researchers working on them, you're basically saying my predictions will never get better.”

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

22 states sue Trump administration for cutting funding to research projects

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

Scientifically Proven: The Best Method for Cutting a Sandwich

Many people believe that cutting a sandwich diagonally to create two triangles is the best way, but there isn’t solid scientific evidence to support this theory.

One explanation is that the triangular shape allows for the first two bites to be taken from a 45-degree corner, which has crust on only one side, giving quicker access to the center of the sandwich where the filling is most concentrated.

After biting into the corner, it’s recommended to eat 1-3 bites diagonally. This part will have no crust, and depending on the sandwich size, you may end up with an additional small triangle.


While each triangle eventually becomes a single 90-degree crust piece, cutting a sandwich into rectangles would result in two crust corners on each half instead of one.

Another reason for cutting sandwiches into triangles is that they are easier to eat: only kids and cartoon characters tend to take their first bite from the middle, resulting in a messy eating experience.

Beginning at one of the corners allows for a cleaner eating experience, and the 45-degree angle of the triangle maximizes the depth of each bite.

For those who want to extend this concept further, the sandwich can be cut into four triangles and eaten in three separate sessions.

This strategy is commonly used at children’s parties, although children often do not eat the 45-degree corner first. In such cases, cutting off the crust altogether may be a better option.

This article is a response to the question “What is the best way to cut a sandwich, scientifically speaking?” (asked by Jeremy Fry of Felixstowe).

If you have any questions, please send them to the email address below. For further information:or send us a message Facebook, Xor Instagram Page (be sure to include your name and location).

Ultimate Fun Facts For more amazing science, check out this page.

read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

Science has proven the most effective method for cutting a sandwich

It is commonly believed that cutting a sandwich diagonally to create two triangles is the best way, but there is limited scientific evidence to support this claim.

One theory suggests that the triangular shape allows for the first two bites to be taken from a 45-degree corner, which has crust on only one side, making it easier to access the center of the sandwich where the filling is most concentrated.

After eating the corner, take 1-3 bites diagonally, missing the crust. Depending on the size of the sandwich, you may be left with an additional small triangle.


Ultimately, each triangle will become a single 90-degree chunk of crust. However, cutting the sandwich into rectangles would result in two crust corners on each half.

Another reason for cutting sandwiches into triangles is that they are easier to eat. Starting at one of the corners leads to a cleaner bite, and the 45-degree angle of the triangle maximizes the engagement depth.

If taken to the extreme, cutting the sandwich into four triangles allows for a neat eating experience in three bites.

This cutting strategy is often used at children’s parties, though kids might not always start with the 45-degree corner. In such cases, simply cutting off the crust altogether may be the best option.

This article provides insight into the scientifically best way to cut a sandwich, as inquired by Jeremy Fry of Felixstowe.

If you have any questions, please contact us via the email address provided below. For more information, feel free to reach out to:or message us on Facebook, Twitteror Instagram Page (please include your name and location).

Get ready for some Fun Facts For more fascinating science topics, visit this page.

read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

Is it possible to enjoy cake while also cutting out sugar? Welcome to the sugar-free world.

I I eagerly anticipate chocolate chip cookies in the kitchen shared by a bio-based startup in San Francisco. Despite being diagnosed with pre-diabetes a few years back, I typically steer clear of sweets. However, I have a secret weapon – Monchi Monchi, a unique plant fiber-based drink mix designed to expand in the stomach like a sponge, soaking up sugar from food and preventing premature absorption.

The concept behind this product is that it can trap a significant amount of sugar, with laboratory tests showing it can absorb 6 grams of sugar per 1 gram of the mix. Various types of sugar like sucrose, glucose, fructose, and some simple starches can be sequestered. With each sachet containing just over 4 grams, the goal is to counteract the sugar in snacks and provide the gut with fiber replenishment. “How can you enjoy food without compromising your health? I believe we’ve found a solution,” shared Paolo Costa, the company’s co-founder and CEO, as he demonstrated mixing the powder with water and consuming it.

Welcome to the emerging technology of carbohydrate removal, which focuses on neutralizing carbohydrates post-consumption rather than pre-consumption. Despite the rising rates of diabetes and obesity, sugar substitutes, the main method for reducing sugar intake, fall short. They can alter the taste and texture of foods and raise safety concerns. Additionally, they do not stimulate the brain’s reward centers like sugar does. Sugar removal technology offers the enticing prospect of enjoying sugar in a healthier, guilt-free manner. John Topinka, the research and strategy director at Kraft Heinz, believes the entire food industry could benefit from such technology.

Launched in 2019, BioLumen introduced Monch Monch to the U.S. market as a supplement in November. Each granule, a unique microsponge, is composed of plant cellulose (insoluble fibers) infused with the company’s specialized hydrogel (soluble fibers) designed to soak up sugar. Priced at $150 (approximately £120) per month for two bags daily, the product is not widely available yet. However, BioLumen’s vision is to offer it as an ingredient for food manufacturers to incorporate into their products. Having already received “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) designation in the US, the company is actively working on lowering costs.

The chief medical officer and co-founders of BioLumen include Robert Lustig, a Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, known for raising awareness about the health risks of excessive sugar consumption. While presenting unpublished data from a small human trial showing reduced blood sugar spikes and insulin response with the product, Lustig emphasized the need for a larger, longer-term study to confirm the findings. Further tests, including stool studies, are necessary to determine the exact amount of excreted sugar and its overall efficacy in countering sugar intake.


a Sugar sponges are not the only solution being explored. Some are pursuing a different path by converting sugar into fiber in the intestines. This feat surpasses the digestive enzymes’ capabilities but can be achieved by integrating specific enzymes into foods in carefully measured quantities.

Researchers at Harvard University’s Wyss Institute for Bioinspired Engineering, in collaboration with Kraft Heinz, developed a method utilizing naturally occurring plant enzymes to convert sugars into fiber and encasing them in an edible coating.

The coating, made of fibers, keeps the enzymes dormant in the food while on shelves. In less acidic conditions in the intestines, the coating expands to release the enzymes that break down sugars into simpler components like glucose and fructose. Fructose is converted into soluble fiber, beneficial to the gut microbiome, producing inulin.

Most of the glucose, however, is still absorbed by the body. By encapsulating enzymes that convert glucose into fiber, the coating could potentially offer further benefits. Wyss plans to license this technology to a start-up for further testing and regulatory approval, with anticipated commercialization among US manufacturers in 2026.

Joining Wyss in the enzyme pathway is a British start-up, Zaya, formerly known as Inulox. Their product, Convero, is an enhanced version of a natural inulosucrase enzyme distinct from Wyss’s. Zya’s research shows that this substance, produced using genome-edited microorganisms, efficiently converts sugar into fiber in the intestines.

Through simulated gut models, Zya found that around 30% of carbohydrates are converted to fiber, primarily targeting fructose for conversion into inulin. This proposed change holds promise for humanity, potentially enabling impactful claims in the food industry. Initial pig studies on the natural enzyme showed no harm to the animals, with further studies planned for the enhanced version and human trials.

Requiring minimal amounts for efficacy, both Wyss’s and Zya’s enzymes are easily integrated into existing foods without significant modifications. While there may be an additional cost premium, it is deemed manageable. Zya aims to secure US regulatory approval as a food ingredient by 2026, with plans to expand into Europe and the UK.

Emphasizing functional claims over health claims, Zya focuses on the sugar-to-fiber conversion aspect. By making sugar more digestible, the company envisions a shift towards a more beneficial sugar consumption approach. “Enjoy sugar responsibly with improved digestion,” states Josh Sauer, CEO of Zya.

While these innovative techniques hold promise in mitigating sugar impact on the body, further research is necessary, notes Graham McGregor, charity chairman and professor at the Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London. Careful evaluation of clinical trials and safety considerations is crucial before widespread adoption of such products.

Despite the potential benefits, Professor Tim Spector, from King’s College London and co-founder of personal nutrition company Zoe, raises concerns about these products encouraging unhealthy food choices. Stressing the importance of whole foods and reducing ultra-processed products, Spector suggests focusing on a balanced diet. The technology offers tools to manage sugar intake but does not address other harmful food components, urging a holistic dietary approach.

While the future of sugar reduction technologies is promising, Lustig highlights the ongoing challenge of giving up sugar entirely. “We need all the tools we can get,” he concludes.

Source: www.theguardian.com