Taking Stock: Putting the squeeze on science (& people, climate, the world . . .)
Reshaping American science | US aid freeze | Bird flu vaccine | Africa's growing economies
Apologies for missing several weeks of getting this Taking Stock newsletter out, which is supposed to appear most Thursdays. I broke my laptop back in January and new parts take six weeks to get to Nairobi, Kenya, where I live. I hope you are all well—not drowning in the daily deluge of news. I was going to say that ‘we live in interesting times, indeed’, but my Google AI assistant tells me that that phrase ‘is commonly attributed to a supposed Chinese curse, though no such phrase actually exists in Chinese culture’. (And in any case, that verbal irony is today more aptly experienced as an American curse.)
How the Trump administration wants to reshape American science—The Economist
The consequences will be felt around the world
’The annual meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science afford researchers a chance to show off what they do best. Those roaming the corridors in Boston between February 13th and 15th were treated to talks on everything from plate tectonics and ancient DNA analysis to gene editing and nuclear power. All represent the cutting-edge research to be expected in a country that has long prided itself on, as per this year’s theme, producing the “science shaping tomorrow”.
‘At the moment, though, it is science itself that is being shaped. Mere weeks into the second Trump administration, scientists worry that their flagship institutions are under assault. The National Scientific Foundation (NSF) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for example, have been told to prepare for hefty reductions to their budgets and staff cuts of up to 50%. Across several federal agencies, mass firings of thousands of “probationary” workers, meaning those recently hired or promoted, have already begun. Research institutions reliant on funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), meanwhile, have been warned of restrictions on how they can spend their money.
‘These moves are part of Donald Trump’s and Elon Musk’s aspiration to cut $2trn from the annual federal budget of approximately $7trn. This has put all the government’s outgoings, including the roughly $160bn spent every year on basic and applied research, under the microscope. Another motivation is a suspicion that scientists and their research have become tools of a “woke ideology”. Precisely which of the administration’s changes will survive legal challenge is still unclear. But the scale of the cuts and the manner in which they are being introduced could seriously damage American science.
‘The deepest slashes proposed so far concern the $44bn in grants allocated by the NIH. Many institutions routinely use NIH funds to cover between 50% and 70% of their “indirect” costs, which includes things such as laboratory maintenance, equipment provision and salaries for support and administrative staff. The administration sees that share as too high, and wants to cap indirect costs at 15% of the grant total, in line with similar limits set by private organisations, forcing institutions to pay for the remainder themselves. . . .
‘The government’s proposal of a 15% cap undoes the social contract “for institutions and the federal government to co-build the infrastructure for American science,” says Holden Thorp, editor-in-chief of the Science family of journals.
‘Analysis by The Economist finds that a total of $6.3bn in NIH funding could be at stake. Studies of endocrinology, diabetes and metabolism would see cuts of almost a fifth of their total budget . . . . This could have serious consequences for medical research. It may also backfire politically: many of the institutions hardest-hit would be in Republican states. Universities in Alabama, for example, received $386m in funding from the NIH in 2024, supporting more than 4,700 jobs and $900m-worth of economic activity.
‘Whether the cap will come into force, though, is still unclear. . . . For now, the atmosphere of uncertainty is unlikely to be conducive to progress in a field where researchers prioritise long-term stability.
‘Another prong of the administration’s actions is an attempt to influence what research is funded. Russell Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, has previously suggested cuts as a way of ensuring scientific institutions like the NSF cannot “propagandise for woke ideology”.
Federal agencies are now required to review all grants in light of an executive order terminating programmes aimed at promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), which Mr Trump has argued has made government less meritocratic. . . .
‘Removing boilerplate language from future grant applications will be time-consuming but doable. Getting exemptions for research that has been wrongly flagged may also be possible, though no process to do so has yet been made public. But some valuable research may be dropped.
‘It is research on climate change that faces the most pressing and concrete threats. Almost all mentions of climate change and programmes to combat it have been scrubbed from federal websites, and the National Nature Report—the first assessment of nature and biodiversity across the government, produced by more than 150 scientists and funded with government money—was cancelled weeks before the first full draft was due. . . .
‘Much of such funding is administrated through NOAA, the federal agency which oversees atmospheric science and environmental monitoring, including weather forecasting and making projections about climate change. NOAA itself is squarely in the cross-hairs. “Project 2025”, a set of campaign proposals for how Mr Trump should reform the federal government (and to which Mr Vought contributed), described NOAA as a major player in the “climate-change alarm industry” and called for it to be “broken up and downsized”.
‘That would have consequences beyond America’s borders. Several media outlets, including the Washington Post and Wired, reported internal emails to some NOAA staff instructing them to pause “all international engagements”. Many meteorological and climate agencies around the world rely on the observations and data collected by NOAA. The worst affected will be agencies in poor countries, which often do not have the money or infrastructure to make their own detailed weather forecasts and climate projections . . . .’
Economist.com | @TheEconomist
+ The Economist ‘Simply Science’ newsletter
‘[I]t is worth remembering what is at stake. America has a peerless record of scientific innovation. It is the country where the first fully synthetic plastic was invented, the polio vaccine was developed, nuclear energy was first harnessed, the full human genome was mapped and the first successful moon landing was launched. . .’
‘The system is breaking’: US aid freeze threatens child malnutrition care—Tania Karas
‘On paper, a lifesaving waiver would be expected to keep programs open, when in reality, that’s not happening,’ a humanitarian aid official says.
‘Navyn Salem, the CEO of a Rhode Island-based producer of lifesaving foods for malnourished children, was in Sierra Leone last month when she got an email that made her heart drop.
‘It was a notice of the Trump administration’s 90-day freeze on all U.S. foreign assistance. And Edesia — the nonprofit she founded that makes a high-calorie, nutrient-dense peanut paste known as RUTF, or ready-to-use therapeutic food — had just received two stop-work orders that would force it to pause its work for that period as the Trump administration reviews all U.S. foreign aid programs.
‘“We sat there speechless. We had just visited, 30 minutes earlier, a hospital that had boxes of RUTF in the corner that said ‘Made in Rhode Island’ and made it here to Sierra Leone. It was the only supply of lifesaving food for these children,” she said. . . .
‘Malnutrition tends to hit the very youngest children the hardest, and most aid agencies focus on treating and preventing malnutrition in the first 1,000 days of life, from a woman’s pregnancy to the child’s second birthday. For these children, time is of the essence. A treatment delay of a few days or weeks — let alone 90 days — can be a matter of life and death, and the effects can be lifelong: impaired brain development and weakened immune systems. . . .
‘Though aid organizations are starting to receive waivers or permission to resume work, the permission is often partial, and they still can’t access the funds they are owed by the U.S. government in order to perform their work. In addition to immediate disruptions to the RUTF supply chain, experts tell Devex that they expect supply shortages in the longer term as well.
‘“The system is breaking,” said an official with a humanitarian aid organization that treats severely malnourished children, who spoke on condition of anonymity so as to not jeopardize their U.S. funding. “Supplies are not getting to people. We’ve got staff being fired across the board because these organizations are supported by U.S. government funds. And you can’t run programs without staff.”
Nearly half of all child deaths annually can be attributed to undernutrition, according to UNICEF, and some 148 million children worldwide—about 1 in 5—are chronically malnourished to some degree. The worst-affected regions are the Horn of Africa and the Sahel.
‘. . . In Nigeria alone, the Danish Refugee Council—whose second-largest donor is the United States, contributing 20% of its budget—has been forced to stop providing treatment to 150 children under the age of 5 each month who suffer from severe acute malnutrition, along with other medical complications. It has also stopped providing supplemental nutritional assistance to 400 children monthly and halted cash aid that helps 30,000 displaced people meet their basic food needs on their own. . . .
Due to the interconnected nature of global health supply chains, the entire ecosystem of facilities and programs providing malnutrition services is affected by the U.S. aid freeze whether they get U.S. funding or not.
‘The U.S. government is a massive donor to global malnutrition treatment and prevention. USAID funded more than $1 billion in nutrition programming in over 30 countries in fiscal year 2023. The majority of that funding came via the agency’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, which tends to focus on emergency settings, while $160 million was channeled through global health programs.
‘The two big U.N. agencies working in this space are UNICEF, which treats severe acute malnutrition, and the World Food Programme, which treats moderate acute malnutrition. UNICEF procures an estimated 75% to 80% of the global demand for RUTF, averaging 50,000 metric tons per year — which is enough to treat 3.6 million children annually, according to the agency’s estimates. WFP tends to work with another kind of specialized food called ready-to-use supplementary food.
‘Both UNICEF and WFP are major recipients of USAID funding, and both received stop-work orders. WFP has since been granted permission to resume in-kind food aid purchases and deliveries and to work with NGOs to distribute emergency food assistance to people in crisis settings after it was found that more than 507,000 metric tons of food aid valued at more than $340 million was stranded due to the foreign aid freeze. . . .
One major problem is that they can’t access their funds from the U.S. government. USAID’s payment system, Phoenix, is still not operating, which means that even with a waiver, groups cannot draw down that money—and are thus faced with dipping into their own limited cash reserves. . . .
‘Further, because the Trump administration has moved to terminate almost the entirety of USAID’s global workforce, which once numbered close to 13,000 , groups often cannot communicate with the agency to ask questions or updates on the status of their payments. It’s unclear to what extent that may have changed now that access for some staffers has been restored following a U.S. federal court ruling. . . .’
devex.com | @devex | @TaniaKaras
A bird flu vaccine for chickens is on its way—Bruce Gil
The vaccine was developed by the animal health company Zoetis
"‘In a bid to contain a bird flu outbreak that has sent egg prices soaring, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) last week granted a conditional license for a vaccine designed to protect chickens from the virus.
‘The vaccine was developed by animal health giant Zoetis and received approval on Friday. In a statement, the company said that it began updating its existing bird flu vaccine in 2022, as outbreaks of the highly contagious virus spread through poultry flocks.
‘The USDA issued the conditional license after reviewing data on the vaccine’s safety, purity, and what it called a “reasonable expectation of efficacy.” Zoetis noted that conditional approvals are usually granted in emergencies or special circumstances. They remain in effect for a limited time but can be renewed if necessary. . . .
‘Unlike some countries that vaccinate poultry against bird flu, the U.S. has historically relied on culling — killing – infected flocks to contain outbreaks. Officials have long been wary of using vaccines, citing concerns that they could complicate virus detection and disrupt international trade. This approval signals a potential shift in strategy.
‘Over 159 million birds, including commercial poultry, have been infected with the bird flu since 2022, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In just the past 30 days, over 23 million cases among U.S. birds were detected.
‘When health officials confirm bird flu in a flock, the birds are killed in order to stop the spread of the virus. A farm in N.Y. recently made headlines after being forced to euthanize 100,000 ducks following a positive test for the virus.
‘This has led to a shrinking of the nation’s egg-laying hen population and surge in egg prices. . . .’
qz.com | @qz | brucgl
How would bird flu vaccination actually work?—Robert Yaman
To turn bird flu into a political win, Trump should move quickly
‘Last week, USDA granted conditional approval for a vaccine for bird flu, which marks a potential turning point in our approach to avian influenza. This doesn’t mean that we can start vaccinating birds right away—USDA must still grant full approval due to special regulations around highly-pathogenic avian influenza. But this move could be a signal that USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins is following through on her commitments to seriously tackle this issue. . . .
‘Undertaking a vaccination campaign of the US layer flock is the only reliable way to bring egg prices down to historic levels and have them stay there. However, this would be a massively complex undertaking that could take years to come to full fruition. . . .
‘[T[here are a few reasons we should do a vaccination campaign for our layer flock. Firstly, it can avoid the needless killing of tens of millions birds per year, often via inhumane methods.
‘Secondly, vaccination is the only way to get eggs back on the shelf and ensure long-term price stability.
‘Lastly, vaccination can help minimize the chance that H5N1 causes a human pandemic. Prediction markets currently put the risk of H5N1 causing a COVID-level pandemic at 4-5%. This may not seem high, but considering the multi-trillion dollar effect that COVID had on our economy, and the generally crappy time everyone had during lockdowns, it’s worth bringing down as much as possible. The Institute for Progress estimates the cost of this outcome in expected value terms as $640 billion. Vaccinating layers wouldn’t eliminate this risk, but it would meaningfully lower it. . . .
Actually getting vaccines to the over 300 million layers is going to be a massive undertaking and it will take some time for results to show up. . . .
‘The Zoetis vaccine that recently got conditional approval is a H5N2 subtype1 killed virus vaccine. This means that non-infectious bits of the virus are injected into the healthy bird, teaching the bird's immune system what to look for. These types of vaccines are typically administered to a bird that’s a few weeks old, and for layers will likely have to be given in two doses for full effectiveness. . . . [I]t may take at least a year to see the full effects of a vaccination campaign, likely longer. . . .’
We . . . have a rare issue where rational policy making and political expediency are aligned. Vaccination simultaneously addresses food prices, animal welfare, and pandemic risk, turning a persistent crisis into a clear political win.
OptimistsBarn.substack.com | @robert_yaman
Africa’s economy is expected to grow by 4.1% this year, the African Development Bank projected, a 0.9-percentage-point rise from 2024—Semafor Africa
‘The improvement will be driven by economic reforms in several countries, AfDB wrote, predicting improvements in inflationary pressures as well as fiscal and debt positions. The World Bank has projected an average of 4.2% growth in sub-Saharan Africa this year and next. South Sudan is projected to record the highest growth this year with an estimated rise of 34.4%, AfDB said, while Rwanda, Senegal, and Uganda are each expected to grow more than 7%. The bank expects Equatorial Guinea and Sudan will be the only nations with contracting economies in 2025. Twelve of the world’s 20 fastest-growing economies this year will be in Africa, AfDB said.’
semafor.com | @SemaforAfrica
Arresting headlines
USDA tries to reverse mistaken firing of bird flu response workers: The department is trying to rehire the employees as avian influenza causes egg prices to soar and as Elon Musk’s DOGE makes sweeping cuts to government agencies—Washington Post (h/t Lynn Brown)
OpenAI’s ‘deep research’ tool: is it useful for scientists?: The model produces cited, pages-long reports that might be helpful for generating literature reviews—Nature
ChatGPT's deep research might be the first good agent: OpenAI's new research tool still makes mistakes—but in its speed and average quality of analysis, it represents a remarkable step forward—Platformer
Health worker lay-offs in east Africa following US aid freeze (Lancet, h/t Brian Perry)
‘It is chaos’: US funding freezes are endangering global health: Abrupt changes to programmes including USAID inhibit global efforts to stop disease such as HIV, malaria and more, say researchers—Nature
Scientists globally are racing to save vital health databases taken down amid Trump chaos: The mass-archiving effort is in response to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removing some of its web pages—Nature
By cutting off assistance to foreigners, America hurts itself: Donald Trump’s chaotic aid freeze makes his country weaker—The Economist
NIH plans to slash support for indirect research costs, sending shockwaves through science: Capping these payments would ‘just grind our scientific complex to a halt,’ one researcher said—STAT News
Philanthropic groups launch antibiotic discovery program—CIDRAP