Democrats chanted victory on Sunday, when the Congress approved the $1 trillion bill funding for the government. There may be no government shutdown this fiscal year, but the war is far from over. Trump lost another battle with Congress on Monday. His proposals to cut NIH and NASA budget for research in 2017 were brutally dismissed.
One of Trump’s most controversial proposals was to cut NIH budget by $1.23 billion for this fiscal year, and by $6 billion for 2018. The Congress, however, gave this proposal the cold shoulder and gave the National Institutes of Health a raise of $2 billion.
Where Did Trump’s Idea to Cut NIH Budget for Research Come from?
Many policymakers have been questioning the $30 billion NIH spends on academic research every year, and whether these spendings bring about tangible results for taxpayers. Former president Obama himself asked for solid proofs of research efficiency.
Trump stopped waiting for answers and proposed the above-mentioned budget cuts. His timing couldn’t have been worse. A a recent study conducted by a Harvard Business School team proves that public funding is essential for biomedical research advances.
The study, The Applied Value of Public Investments in Biomedical Research, concluded that, although only 10% of the NIH grants lead to a patent, 30% lead to results cited by patents. NIH research generates knowledge private companies use to develop new drugs, therapies, medical devices, and patented biomedical products.
No less than 4,400 of the patents linked to NIH research the study reviews referred to FDA approved drugs. Why did the administration miss that? It took between 10 and 15 years for the publicly funded research to pay off and turn into commercial licensing of lab discoveries.
Luckily, the Congress understood the necessity of supplementing the budget for research and acted as reported above. Thanks to the $2 billion raised, NIH budget for 2017 reached $34 billion. Several other budget proposals of the Trump’s administration received similar treatment.
NASA Budget Escaped Cutting for Now
Another proposal dismissed by the Congress refers to NASA budget. Trump proposed a cut, but the Congress approved a 1.9 % increase. According to NBC News, NASA budget for this fiscal year will reach $19.5 billion until the end of this fiscal year. $1.9 billion of this money will go to earth science.
Trump’s budget proposals make it clear: he doesn’t believe in research, certainly not in research related to medical care and climate change. He seems to be far more interested in space traveling. For now, he lost the battle with Congress over the budget for research in 2017. However, the House and the Senate still have a saying.
11-Year-Old Scientist Creates Lead Detector for Water.
Genius can show itself in many ways, some people have propositions, others create. It’s all a game of “Who can implement these solutions to a full extent?”. This 11-year-old girl decided to take the matters into her own hands and revolutionized the world of science and health. By creating a lead detector device, this girl contributed to end the massive contamination of the liquids in her region once and for all.
The story begins at Flint, Michigan. An 11-year-old girl named Gitanjali Rao took notice of the water crisis people were having at the time. The drinking water became contaminated with led and caused a major public health crisis.
“I had been following the Flint, Michigan, issue for about two years,” Gitanjali told ABC News. “I was appalled by the number of people affected by lead contamination in water and I wanted to do something to change this.”
When she saw the current solutions that were painfully average and slow at best. The girl decided to step up and fight this, but how? Lead isn’t that easy to detect in contaminated water, right? Well, like any inventor, she made her best effort to make this an easy process for everyone.
She told Business Insider that: “I went, ‘Well, this is not a reliable process and I’ve got to do something to change this,’ ” And so, she went on a quest to find the best solution to the problem.
First, she went to the MIT’s Materials Science and Engineering website to see “if there’s anything’s new,” she read about new technologies that could detect hazardous substances and decided to see whether they could be adapted to test for lead.
Once she found out a project that worked best, she created a device that fulfills one basic purpose: Identify lead compounds in water, portable and relatively inexpensive. And she succeeded.
The device consists of 3 essential parts: There is a disposable cartridge containing chemically treated carbon nanotube arrays, an Arduino-based signal processor with a Bluetooth attachment, and a smartphone app that can display the results. The name? Tethys, like the Greek Goddess of Fresh Water.
How does it work? The carbon nanotubes in the cartridge are sensitive to changes in the flow of electrons. Those tubes are lined with atoms that have an affinity to lead, which adds a measurable resistance to the electron flow.
Once the cartridge is dipped in water that is clean, the electron flow doesn’t change and the smartphone app shows that water is safe to drink. However, if it is contaminated water, the lead in the water reacts to the atoms, causing resistance in the electron flow that is measured by the Arduino processor. The app then shows that the water isn’t safe to drink.
This invention is such a work of art and creativity; it deserves the greatest amount of recognition. And as such, Rao was dubbed “America’s Top Young Scientist” in the Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge this distinction comes with a check for $25,000, more than enough compensation for saving many.
Here at GeekReply, we hope that this child genius aspires to the greatest of futures. With the recent contributions that have been helping science and health developments. People like this could be a great help for the brighter future of human society.
General Motors to Release 20 Electric Cars by 2023
There have been a lot of new pushes to take the electric cars to the next level. A lot of countries have been approving laws that will decrease the use of fuel cars for the sake of a better future. It seems like General Motors is going to add more to the plans of a greener environment where cars are usually hybrid or electric.
In a push to produce cars powered by batteries or fuel cells, General Motors laid out a strategy to vastly expand the number of electric models in the marketplace. G.M. said it would introduce two new all-electric models within 18 months as part of a broader plan toward what the company says is the ultimate goal of an emissions-free fleet. The two models will be the first of at least 20 new all-electric vehicles that G.M. plans to bring out by 2023.
G.M.’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, announced in September that the company, America’s largest automaker, expected the industry to move aggressively toward an automotive future with zero emissions, traffic accidents and highway congestion.
“General Motors believes in an all-electric future,” Mark Reuss said at a media event at the company’s technical center in the Detroit suburb of Warren. “Although that future won’t happen overnight, G.M. is committed to driving increased usage and acceptance of electric vehicles.”
He declined to specify what type of new models will be built off the Bolt’s underpinnings, but the chief of G.M.’s electrification strategy, Pam Fletcher, said the company is focusing on the development of sport utility vehicles and car-based crossover models.
There still isn’t a set timeframe for an all-electric portfolio of products, and the company expects to continue making cars and trucks powered by gasoline engines for an indefinite period of time. But at the very least they want to make some progress like many other companies have.
California Might Ban the Sale of Non-Electric Cars
Gas-powered cars might soon be a thing of the past in California, at least if Governor Jerry Brown and chairman of the California Air Resources Board Mary Nichols have any say on the matter.
According to Bloomberg, Nichols claimed Brown is interested in banning the sale of cars (and other vehicles) that use an internal-combustion engine within the state of California. This ban is not just a response to similar proposed bans in foreign countries, including China and France; it is also designed to help California meet climate goals set by Global Automakers, which hope to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80% from 1990 levels. According to Nichols, the best way to reach this goal is to “pretty much replace all combustion with some form of renewable energy by 2040 or 2050.” Replacing internal-combustion engines with electric engines just might do the trick.
While the ban won’t take effect for at least a decade, Nichols believes it might run into several legal problems. While California can create pollution laws thanks to the Clean Air Act, these laws need to be supported by waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). However, the EPA has been under attack from the Trump administration, which, according to Nichols, means California likely won’t receive an EPA waiver to enforce the ban. However, Nichols has suggested several alternatives, such as controlling of vehicle registration rules and deciding which vehicles can or can’t access state highways.
Another possible wrench in Brown and Nichols’ ban plan is if it’s feasible. Global Automakers has purportedly claimed that China’s internal-combustion engine car ban would be impossible, although, to be fair, China’s plan is much more ambitious. Instead of replacing all internal-combustion cars by 2050, China hopes to replace one-fifth of their cars by 2025, create quotas in 2018 to facilitate the replacements, and to enforce severe penalties on those who doesn’t comply. At first glance, this plan doesn’t look more ambitious, but reports indicate the number of people who own cars in China eclipses the population of California. Depending on how California plans to enforce the ban, Global Automakers might oppose it.
Nichols believes a ban on selling non-electric cars could happen as early as 2030, but we will have to wait much longer to see if the ban effectively cuts down on carbon dioxide emissions. Or if California car-owners accept the ban.
- Gadgets8 years ago
Why the Nexus 7 is still a good tablet in 2015
- Mobile Devices8 years ago
Samsung Galaxy Note 4 vs Galaxy Note 5: is there room for improvement?
- Editorials8 years ago
Samsung Galaxy Note 4 – How bad updates prevent people from enjoying their phones
- Mobile Devices8 years ago
Nexus 5 2015 and Android M born to be together
- Gaming8 years ago
New Teaser For Five Nights At Freddy’s 4
- Mobile Devices8 years ago
Google not releasing Android M to Nexus 7
- Gadgets8 years ago
Moto G Android 5.0.2 Lollipop still has a memory leak bug
- Mobile Devices8 years ago
Nexus 7 2015: Huawei and Google changing the game