AllYouCanTech

“Financial Support for Research Infrastructure is Crucial for Scientific Advancements”

# The Prospects for Biomedical Research in the United States: Hurdles and Legislative Adjustments

## Overview

For many years, the United States has been at the forefront of biomedical research, largely due to a robust collaboration between academic institutions and the federal government. Nonetheless, recent changes in policy from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) may jeopardize this standing. A newly implemented NIH policy, revealed on February 7, 2025, is designed to diminish funding for research infrastructure, which could impair universities and institutions’ abilities to carry out pioneering research.

This article examines the ramifications of these developments, the significance of indirect costs in research funding, and the scientific community’s reaction.

## The Importance of Federal Funding in Biomedical Research

The United States’ biomedical research sector has flourished due to considerable federal financial support. Universities and research organizations depend on federal grants to conduct investigations that yield medical innovations. The NIH, the main federal body financing biomedical research, disbursed over $35 billion in grants during the 2023 fiscal year, aiding more than 300,000 researchers across over 2,500 organizations.

These grants encompass both **direct costs** (such as salaries, laboratory equipment, and supplies) and **indirect costs** (like facility maintenance, utilities, and administrative assistance). While direct costs facilitate the research itself, indirect costs are vital for ensuring that institutions possess the infrastructure necessary for effective study conduct.

## Clarifying Indirect Costs

Indirect costs, often referred to as **facilities and administrative (F&A) costs**, are crucial for sustaining research environments. These costs consist of:

– Laboratory upkeep and utilities (electricity, heating, ventilation)
– Research security and adherence to federal regulations
– Equipment servicing and hazardous waste management
– Administrative aid for grant oversight and reporting

The federal government compensates institutions for these expenses according to negotiated rates, which may range from **15% to 70%** based on the institution’s requirements. However, the NIH’s recent policy will **restrict indirect cost reimbursement to 15%**, drastically decreasing the financial resources available for research infrastructure.

## The Consequences of NIH’s New Policy

The NIH maintains that the new cap will ensure that a greater proportion of funds is allocated directly to scientific research rather than administrative costs. Yet, many researchers and institutions caution that this adjustment could lead to significant negative outcomes:

– **Diminished Research Capacity**: Organizations may find it challenging to uphold laboratories and facilities, hindering scientific advancement.
– **Financial Pressure on Universities**: Institutions already invest billions of their own resources to cover research expenses. The NIH’s reductions may compel them to shift more assets away from other initiatives.
– **Decline in Global Leadership**: The United States risks falling behind other nations that continue to heavily invest in research infrastructure.

### State-Level Effects

The funding reductions will affect both **red and blue states**. For instance:

– **Texas** institutions could experience a loss of over **$310 million** in funding.
– **Iowa** may encounter a reduction approaching **$37 million**.
– **California** could face losses surpassing **$800 million**.
– **Washington** might experience cuts exceeding **$178 million**.

These financial declines could result in fewer research opportunities, job losses, and a slowdown in medical progress.

## Evaluating NIH’s Policy Against Private Foundations

The NIH has defended the 15% cap by drawing comparisons to indirect cost rates established by private foundations. For example:

– The **Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation** and **Smith Richardson Foundation** set a **10% rate**.
– The **Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation** and **Robert Wood Johnson Foundation** set a **12% rate**.
– The **Carnegie Corporation of New York**, **Chan Zuckerberg Initiative**, and **Rockefeller Foundation** maintain a **15% rate**.

However, researchers contend that this comparison is misleading. Universities often accept foundation grants with low or no overhead rates because they depend on NIH funding for infrastructure expenses. Without adequate NIH support, institutions might struggle to maintain their research activities.

## Reaction from the Scientific Community

The NIH’s ruling has ignited widespread condemnation from researchers, academic institutions, and policymakers.

– The **Council on Governmental Relations** cautioned that the policy would represent a **”self-inflicted wound”** that benefits America’s international competitors.
– The **Association of American Medical Colleges** expressed that the cuts would **”diminish the nation’s research capacity”**, hindering medical progress.
– **Research institutions, scientific organizations, and legislators from both sides** have implored the NIH to rethink the policy.

### Legal Actions

In light of the announcement, **attorneys general from 22 states** initiated lawsuits contesting the policy. A federal judge has subsequently issued a **temporary hold** on the policy in those states, awaiting further legal assessment.

## The Outlook for U.S. Biomedical Research

The long-term impacts of these funding reductions could be profound. Should the NIH not amend its decision

“Main Elements Contributing to Increasing Pedestrian Fatalities and the Difficulties in Tackling Them”

# **AAA Research Illuminates Factors Behind Escalating Pedestrian Deaths**

## **Introduction**
In the United States, pedestrian fatalities have experienced a significant increase in recent years, hitting peak figures not seen in four decades. A recent study by the American Automobile Association (AAA) reports that pedestrian deaths have surged by 83% since 2009, in contrast to a 25% increase in total traffic fatalities. This concerning trend has led researchers to delve into the root causes, uncovering a mix of environmental, social, and infrastructural elements that notably impact at-risk communities.

## **Key Insights from the AAA Study**
The AAA study, carried out in partnership with the Collaborative Sciences Center for Road Safety, scrutinized data from various cities such as Albuquerque, New Mexico; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Memphis, Tennessee. The results highlight several shared factors linked to the rise in pedestrian deaths:

### **1. Surge in Fatalities on Urban Arterial Streets at Night**
A key finding from the study reveals that a large proportion of pedestrian fatalities transpire nocturnally on urban arterial streets. Designed primarily for high-speed vehicular traffic, these roads frequently lack essential pedestrian infrastructure like sidewalks and crosswalks. The blend of insufficient lighting, fast-moving cars, and restricted pedestrian access significantly heightens the likelihood of deadly accidents.

### **2. Socioeconomic Inequities in Pedestrian Fatalities**
The research indicated that pedestrian deaths are more prevalent in older, low-income neighborhoods characterized by greater social deprivation. Areas with a higher incidence of multifamily housing and a larger share of workers in sectors such as arts, entertainment, food service, and accommodations also witness a disproportionate number of pedestrian fatalities. This indicates that economically disadvantaged neighborhoods suffer more from hazardous road conditions.

### **3. Impact of Vehicle Design**
Though the study doesn’t solely blame the surge in pedestrian deaths on the growing prevalence of SUVs, it recognizes that larger and taller vehicles present an elevated risk to pedestrians. Research indicates that SUVs and trucks are more likely to inflict severe injuries or fatalities in pedestrian collisions due to their elevated front-end design, which primarily affects a pedestrian’s upper body instead of their legs.

### **4. Distracted and Impaired Driving**
While distracted driving and alcohol consumption are not the foremost causes of the rise in pedestrian fatalities, they remain influencing factors. The pervasive use of smartphones has led to increased driver distraction, while both driver and pedestrian intoxication heightens the probability of accidents.

## **Challenges in Mitigating the Issue**
Despite the clear indicators of infrastructural and political challenges, enhancing pedestrian safety continues to be a major hurdle. The AAA study outlines several barriers:

### **1. Insufficient Infrastructure Funding**
Many urban arterial streets were designed with an emphasis on vehicular traffic rather than pedestrian safety. Upgrading these roads to incorporate improved lighting, sidewalks, and crosswalks is costly, and financial resources for such initiatives are often lacking.

### **2. Conflicts in Jurisdiction**
In numerous cities, major arterial roads are owned and overseen by state governments, restricting local governments’ capabilities to enact safety enhancements. This bureaucratic obstacle complicates cities’ efforts to adopt proactive pedestrian protection measures.

### **3. Absence of Political Motivation**
The study proposes that American society has become excessively tolerant of traffic fatalities, resulting in a diminished urgency regarding pedestrian safety. In the absence of substantial public demand for change, policymakers may persist in prioritizing vehicular traffic over pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.

## **Possible Solutions**
Jake Nelson, the director of traffic safety advocacy at AAA, underscores the importance of data-driven investments in pedestrian safety, especially in historically underfunded communities. Some viable solutions include:

– **Enhancing Road Design:** Integrating pedestrian-friendly elements like crosswalks, speed bumps, and improved lighting into arterial streets.
– **Reducing Speed Limits:** Lowering speed limits in high-risk zones can substantially lessen the severity of pedestrian accidents.
– **Boosting Public Transportation:** Expanding public transit options can diminish dependence on cars and foster safer pedestrian environments.
– **Raising Awareness and Enforcement:** Stricter enforcement of distracted and impaired driving regulations can help alleviate some risks.

## **Conclusion**
The increase in pedestrian fatalities presents a multifaceted challenge shaped by road design, socioeconomic factors, vehicle trends, and driver behavior. While the AAA study brings clarity to the primary factors driving this crisis, achieving meaningful change will demand collaborative efforts from policymakers, urban planners, and community advocates. Without robust investment in pedestrian safety, vulnerable communities will persist in bearing the brunt of this avoidable public health dilemma.

LGBTQ+ Inclusive Information on Vehicle Collision Fatalities Taken Down from NHTSA Site

# Concerns Arise from Removal of Car Crash Data by Trump Administration

## Introduction

In early February 2025, a vital dataset that monitors car crash fatalities across the U.S. inexplicably vanished from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website. The absence of data from 2022 has alarmed safety advocates, researchers, and policymakers who depend on this information to monitor trends and enhance road safety. This occurrence has fueled speculation that the Trump administration might be modifying or potentially discontinuing the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), an essential dataset established in 1975.

## The Significance of FARS Data

The FARS dataset serves as a detailed compilation of police-reported crash incidents from all U.S. states. It plays a key role in recognizing trends in traffic fatalities, such as deaths due to impaired driving or the lack of seatbelt use. This dataset is heavily utilized by safety organizations, policymakers, and researchers to formulate strategies aimed at saving lives on American roads.

The abrupt disappearance of the 2022 dataset has raised red flags among experts who fear that the Trump administration may be striving to manipulate or conceal information that could sway public policy and vehicle safety standards.

## Reaction from NHTSA and Public Response

In response to numerous inquiries, NHTSA largely maintained quiet on the subject. Eventually, the agency issued a vague statement to the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, indicating that the file was removed for “minor corrections” and would be reinstated by the end of the week.

This clarification did little to alleviate concerns, as industry analysts and safety organizations rely on FARS data for evaluating vehicle safety and detecting harmful trends. The absence of transparency has intensified speculation regarding the underlying motives for the removal.

## Theories Surrounding Gender Data and Trump’s Executive Order

One hypothesis circulating among experts suggests that the removal of the 2022 dataset is linked to a modification in the recording of gender data. For the first time, FARS incorporated a category for “Other” genders, including non-binary or unspecified identities.

This alteration coincides with a Trump executive order entitled *”Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”* The order prohibits government agencies from acknowledging gender identities beyond the traditional male and female classifications. Some speculate that the dataset was taken down to align with this directive, although NHTSA has not verified this.

## Consequences for Vehicle Safety Research

The absence of the dataset significantly affects vehicle safety research. Organizations like iSeeCars.com utilize FARS data to pinpoint the most hazardous vehicles on the roads. Their latest findings identified the Hyundai Venue, Chevrolet Corvette, Mitsubishi Mirage, Porsche 911, and Honda CR-V Hybrid as the top five most perilous cars based on fatal accident statistics.

Tesla vehicles, including the Model Y and Model S, were also highlighted for elevated fatal accident rates, despite the company’s advanced driver-assist technology. This information is crucial for consumers aiming to make knowledgeable choices regarding vehicle safety.

## Trump’s Initiative to Eliminate Crash Reporting Mandates

The missing dataset controversy reflects a larger initiative by the Trump administration to reduce vehicle safety regulations. In December 2024, a document acquired by *Reuters* revealed that Trump’s transition team contemplated abolishing a requisite for reporting car crashes that was opposed by Tesla CEO Elon Musk.

Musk contended that Tesla’s crash statistics are more reliable than those of other manufacturers, and that compulsory reporting unjustly portrays Tesla as accountable for an outsized share of crashes involving advanced driver-assistance technologies. If the reporting requirement is discarded, FARS data would be even more essential for monitoring vehicle safety trends.

## Wider Implications for Road Safety

The deletion of the 2022 dataset is not an isolated event. The University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute has indicated that NHTSA also deleted data from the Crash Report Sampling System (CRSS) for 2022. These datasets are crucial for comprehending trends in fatal and non-fatal crashes, along with pinpointing high-risk situations such as nighttime pedestrian accidents.

Joseph Young, media relations director for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), stressed that while his organization had already downloaded the dataset before its removal, the lack of public access complicates research initiatives.

## The Future of FARS Data

Experts express concern that the Trump administration may lessen the priority or postpone the release of future FARS data. The removed 2022 dataset was merely a preliminary version, with a finalized version anticipated in the spring. Furthermore, the first draft of the 2023 data is expected to be released around the same timeframe.

If the administration persists in obstructing the dissemination of crash data, it could impede efforts to advance road safety and decrease fatalities. Advocates maintain that the data is indispensable for crafting policies that save lives and avert injuries.

## Conclusion

The unexpected withdrawal of the

Curiosity Rover Seizes Stunning Twilight Clouds on Mars

# **Noctilucent Clouds on Mars: An Incredible Atmospheric Wonder**

For many years, researchers have studied noctilucent clouds—delicate, ethereal formations that manifest in the upper atmosphere of Earth during dusk. These “night-glowing” clouds, made up of ice crystals, are found at elevations of 75 to 85 kilometers, reflecting sunlight long after the surface below has plunged into darkness. Remarkably, similar clouds have been identified on Mars, providing fresh perspectives on the atmospheric behavior of the Red Planet.

## **Detection of Noctilucent Clouds on Mars**

The existence of noctilucent clouds on Mars was initially verified nearly 20 years ago by the European Space Agency’s **Mars Express** orbiter. Since that time, scientists have embarked on comprehensive investigations to decipher their formation and characteristics. In contrast to Earth, where these clouds generally occur at mid- and high-latitudes, Martian noctilucent clouds are found near the equator, making them a distinctive atmospheric phenomenon.

## **Curiosity Rover’s Findings**

NASA’s **Curiosity** rover, operational on Mars since 2012, has been pivotal in examining these clouds. Outfitted with its **Mastcam instrument**, the rover has obtained stunning images and time-lapse videos of noctilucent clouds gracefully moving across the Martian atmosphere. These clouds are mainly white, though some display a subtle reddish tone, enhancing their visual appeal.

Curiosity’s extended observation of these clouds over the years has enabled scientists to anticipate their formation with impressive precision. As noted by **Mark Lemmon**, an atmospheric scientist at the Space Science Institute in Boulder, Colorado, the clouds emerge at the same time each Martian year, allowing researchers to organize their observations in advance.

## **The Science of Martian Noctilucent Clouds**

Unlike Earth, where noctilucent clouds arise from water ice, the thin Martian atmosphere suggests that its clouds may consist of **carbon dioxide ice**. Researchers theorize that **gravity waves**—atmospheric disturbances triggered by landscapes and wind patterns—could be cooling the atmosphere sufficiently for carbon dioxide to condense, facilitating cloud formation.

Interestingly, while Curiosity has documented these clouds within **Gale Crater**, other NASA rovers on Mars have not observed similar phenomena. This prompts inquiries into the possibility that unique atmospheric conditions in Gale Crater enhance their development.

## **Importance of These Clouds**

Examining noctilucent clouds on Mars yields critical insights into the planet’s **climate, atmospheric makeup, and seasonal variations**. Understanding the mechanisms behind the formation of these clouds can also shed light on **weather phenomena on Mars**, which is essential for future human exploration.

Moreover, contrasting Martian noctilucent clouds with those on Earth aids scientists in refining atmospheric models, enhancing forecasts related to the weather systems of both planets.

## **Future Prospects**

As Curiosity continues its expedition, it will persist in observing these intriguing clouds, assisting scientists in unveiling the secrets of Mars’ atmosphere. Upcoming missions, including the **Perseverance rover** and future Mars orbiters, may yield even more in-depth observations, further broadening our comprehension of this extraterrestrial occurrence.

With every new finding, Mars continues to astonish us, demonstrating that even in its frigid and sparse atmosphere, there is still a wealth of knowledge to uncover regarding the dynamic processes influencing the Red Planet’s skies.