SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Science Report " 55 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Sign in to save shuffle history.
OPB Science Reporter/Producer Jes Burns wins 2026 Gracie Award
OPB science reporter and producer Jes Burns wins 2026 Gracie Award
EU leads fight against fossil-fuel nations’ push to delay climate science reports
Dispute looms over next review of the latest science on the warming planet as temperatures continue to rise
The New York Times Hires Carolyn Y. Johnson as Science Reporter
The New York Times has appointed veteran science journalist Carolyn Y. Johnson as a reporter on its Science desk, adding... Read More
Pulitzer Prize-winning science author to give lecture at SUNY Plattsburgh
PLATTSBURGH — New Yorker Magazine staff writer and science reporter Elizabeth Kolbert will be on the SUNY Plattsburgh campus for a discussion on how her Pulitzer Prize-winning book, “The Sixth
The local news crisis is also a public health crisis
Health and science reporting is often treated as optional coverage. It is anything but.
Findings in Science Reported from Sun Yat-Sen University (Long-term care insurance and unmet needs in China: perspectives of older adults and family members): Science
According to news reporting originating from Guangzhou, People’ s Republic of China, by NewsRx correspondents, research stated,“ With population aging, many countries have introduced long-term care insurance and provide home-based services for older adults. For more information on this research see: Long-term care insurance and unmet needs in China:...
China’s rare earth weakness, new rocket to rival SpaceX: 7 science highlights
From China unveiling microwave weapons to top neurobiologist leaving US, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
PRESS RELEASE: State Water Contractors release annual science Report
Report shares updates on six studies funded by SWC’s Science Program designed to guide California water management techniques to protect fish and wildlife Press release from the State Water Contractors Today, the State Water Contractors (SWC) released its Annual Science Report for the 2024-25 fiscal year. The report provides updates on six studies, initially funded by more than $4 million from SWC’s Science Program in 2023, designed to generate actionable science that supports fish and habitat protection while maintaining a sustainable water […]
The local news crisis is also a public health crisis
Health and science reporting is often treated as optional coverage. It is anything but.
The Preliminary Lunar Science Report for Artemis II is Out!
Through photographs, spoken observations, drawings, and annotations, the Artemis II crew created a unique scientific record—one that is now available to the science community and the public for further study. Explore highlights here, and find the full suite of reports and select data resources at the bottom of the page.
Alto Neuroscience Reports First Quarter 2026 Financial Results and Recent Business Highlights
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., May 13, 2026--Alto Neuroscience, Inc. ("Alto") (NYSE: ANRO), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of novel precision medicines for neuropsychiatric disorders, today reported financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2026, and highlighted recent progress across its pipeline of clinical-stage product candidates.
Report: NIH, NASA Restrict Co-Authoring With Foreign Scientists
The National Institutes of Health and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration are targeting collaborations between U.S. scientists and foreign researchers, Science reports.
China’s swipe at Starlink; 2,000-year-old ‘computer’: 7 science highlights
From China’s record-breaking hypergravity machine to geoengineering deserts, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Fish named after Blackpink’s Jennie; China’s 6G smart city: 7 science highlights
From two Chinese scientists leaving the US to a desalination prototype, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
The Beauty Of Settled Science
Commenters convinced me I made a subtle mis-step in my framing of Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine. My framing emphasized that social priming studies had failed to replicate, but that many other subfields of psychology hadn’t. This naturally led commenters to point to failed replications in other subfields. Although none of these were as bad as social priming, few or none were entirely problem-free. Instead of emphasizing the difference between social priming and other subfields, I should have emphasized the difference between settled science and novel research. Here are some of my favorite psychology findings: The brain is sculpted by reinforcement learning, and a key driver of this learning is a prediction-error-based algorithm located in the nucleus accumbens and implemented through dopamine. Psychedelic drugs exert their effects through 5-HT2A receptors, pointing to a role for these receptors in some sort of construct like the balance between priors and new evidence. Certain cognitive functions are localized to certain brain areas (for example, impulse control to the frontal lobes; linguistic structure to Broca’s area, linguistic meaning to Wernicke’s area. But injure one of these areas, or render a certain function useless (eg a blind person having no more use for their visual cortex), and these mappings can gradually shift - suggesting that neurons are general-purpose compute whose specialization is a contingent fact about convenience and efficiency rather than a necessity. Most personality traits and general capabilities are about 50% genetic and 50% random, with little role for family environment or childhood history, with a few notable exceptions like partisan preference. Recent research complicates this story, but the further you go from this basic picture, the gnarlier the chains of indirect causation you require. Neurons fire together in “brain waves”, whose exact frequency corresponds with the character of consciousness; These divide neurons into natural subpopulations and linked graphs. The gamma rhythm corresponds surprisingly well to items in conscious awareness. GABA receptors seem to be involved in something like relaxation. By hitting different GABA receptors in different ways, you can modulate the exact type of relaxation you produce. Hitting GABA-A directly is too powerful and can cause dangerous levels of sedation, but allosteric modulation of GABA is an incredibly fruitful strategy that underlies drugs from benzos to barbituates to alcohol. If you know your GABA-A subunits, you can target specific subtypes of relaxation; for example, Ambien hits GABA-A1 and induces sleep. Memory divides somewhat fuzzily into bins of immediate-sensory, short-term, and long-term, with separate retrieval and storage functions, and separate systems for declarative vs. procedural learning. These can be harmed selectively, usually by hippocampal injury, so that some patients can remember their life stories but not form new long-term memories, or learn new skills like bike-riding but not new facts. The exact substrate of memory is unclear but seems to involve new synaptic connections between neurons in at least some way. The ability of modern psychology and psychiatry to treat mental illness is real but limited. SSRIs work for half or slightly fewer than half of patients; antipsychotics work with extreme side effects; benzodiazpines work but produce addiction and tolerance in many (not all) people. Most supplements are stuck in Poor Quality Study Replication Crisis Hell, but melatonin and l-theanine stand out as especially promising. Psychotherapy works with moderate effect size, but (with a few exceptions) seems to be more about the relationship with the provider than the details of the therapy itself. Mental hospitalization can sometimes defuse immediate crises but work less well than mental hospitals would like, with some studies showing overall negative effects. Schizophrenia is mostly genetic, but risk also increases with prenatal infection (especially rubella) and obstetric complications; there is suggestive evidence for roles of social stress and drug use (with psychedelics and marijuana making things worse, and nicotine if anything making things better). Bipolar and schizophrenia are so closely linked on a pathophysiological level that it seems like they might be the same disease; on the clinical level, they do seem to follow two separate courses/prognoses but can sometimes surprise clinicians by eg someone who seemed condemned to permanent schizophrenia unexpectedly recovering. The brain’s native reinforcement learning algorithms cash out in the phenomena of classical and operant conditioning; different reinforcement schedules reinforce at different levels, which can be exploited by bad actors to make especially compelling products (eg slot machines). None of these are immune to doubt. A few are speculative; one or two are genuinely unorthodox. But they’re all a step above one p = 0.049 paper that might not replicate. If they get overturned, they’ll be overturned by the same sort of genuine scientific shift that replaced Ptolemy with Copernicus or Lamarck with Darwin, not some sort of sordid discovery about someone entering random numbers into a spreadsheet. In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote about The Beauty Of Settled Science: If you only care about scientific issues that are controversial, you will end up with a head stuffed full of garbage. The media thinks that only the cutting edge of science is worth reporting on. How often do you see headlines like “General Relativity still governing planetary orbits” or “Phlogiston theory remains false”? So, by the time anything is solid science, it is no longer a breaking headline. “Newsworthy” science is often based on the thinnest of evidence and wrong half the time—if it were not on the uttermost fringes of the scientific frontier, it would not be breaking news. Scientific controversies are problems so difficult that even people who’ve spent years mastering the field can still fool themselves. That’s what makes for the heated arguments that attract all the media attention. Worse, if you aren’t in the field and part of the game, controversies aren’t even fun. Don’t be embarrassed to read elementary science textbooks, either. If you want to pretend to be sophisticated, go find a play to sneer at. If you just want to have fun, remember that simplicity is at the core of scientific beauty [...] A steady diet of science news is bad for you: You are what you eat, and if you eat only science reporting on fluid situations, without a solid textbook now and then, your brain will turn to liquid. Psychology isn’t centrally the new paper in Annals Of Recently-Breaking News saying that an n=5 study showing that large portion sizes increase support for terrorism. Psychology is centrally ideas like brain waves, GABA receptors, reinforcement learning, twin studies, and connectionism. People who think differently are worrying too much about BREAKING NEWS!!!, and should stop. The key distinction isn’t “recent research in social psychology” vs. “recent research in cognitive/bio/behavioral psychology”, as my essay last week unfortunately implied. It’s recent research in general vs. the deposit of settled science, battle-tested hypotheses, and carefully-earmarked speculation. And part of the reason social priming in particular was such a disaster was that it defied that heuristic, building itself up over hundreds of studies until it approached or even entered the pantheon of settled science - before collapsing (5-HTTLPR was also sort of like this). This isn’t a claim that settled science is always right - Freud was “settled science” for a long time - just that there’s an intuitive distinction between the level of credence you should have in the existence of power posing vs. the existence of Broca’s Area. (I compounded this error by calling the last post “Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine”, which suggested I was talking about the new research rather than the settled science. I actually meant to distinguish between research-psychology-the-field vs. clinical-psychology-aka-therapy, but this framing unintentionally pushed against the point I wanted to make) Some commenters on the previous article understood this point, but challenged its weight. It’s very cool, they said, to know how many neurons are in which brain lobe, but the main way that Psychology affected their lives was through bad clickbait studies used to buttress dumb policies; some p = 0.049 study says that exposure to microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel into raisins, and now their company has to implement punitive DEI or be sued for hazardous work conditions. I won’t dispute this as an accurate description of how the sausage gets made, but it’s worth examining the trains of thought that connect this observation to a campaign against psychology in general: The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad, and I don’t have good heuristics for distinguishing dumb woke psychology from other psychology, so I’m going to assume it’s all wrong and bad. The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad; it seems useful to punish/discredit psychology as a whole to assist my campaign against it, so for propaganda purposes I will try to discredit psychology as a whole. To people in the first camp, my response is: come on, your heuristics aren’t that bad. “Microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel up like raisins” is in the woke category; “the hippocampal theta rhythm seems to be associated with both memory and pathfinding, suggesting an unexpected yet surprisingly compelling relationship between the two” is in the not-woke category, don’t play dumb here. To people in the second camp, my response is: deliberately exaggerated propaganda campaigns are bad and this is a confession, not an excuse. Inability to view science through anything but a political lens was what got us into this problem; doubling down on it is a temporary solution but a recipe for permanent disaster. If you pronounce entire fields of science to be acceptable collateral damage in your campaign against bad political actors, you will alienate not just scientists but patients, clinicians, and general lovers of truth. Instead, you can say the thing you mean - that woke partisans shouldn’t try to occupy and exploit the otherwise-noble science of psychology for their own political gain - and wage the same campaign with a halo rather than a comic-book-villain goatee. From the font of oracular wisdom that is Weird Sun Twitter: [ Vessel Of Spirit@VesselOfSpirit i love you all conditionally but i love the good part of you unconditionally. even if it becomes a very small part 2:11 AM · Jan 22, 2015 1 Reply · 5 Reposts · 29 Likes ](https://x.com/VesselOfSpirit/status/558084551772471298) This is how I feel about psychology1, too, but with a touch more optimism. The good part of psychology is enormous, a hoard of endless treasures. You just have to look past the headlines! 1 To play devil’s advocate - should one always be so magnamious? Astrology? Phrenology? These seem different in that their entire orientation was flawed from the start; they didn’t simply fail to find the correct constellation-personality connections, the whole project of searching for connections between constellations and personality was doomed from the start. More difficult might be asking the same question about education research, which is notoriously bad. I don’t know enough about education research to know if there’s some settled science of correct and enlightening results lurking in the background beyond the day-to-day froth of poorly-conducted and politically-motivated studies. I think if it’s 90% bad, 10% good, it’s correct to call it bad as a compact way of communicating a useful truth; I think psychology is better than that, but admit it’s a tough judgment call.
The sludge in your shower drain? That could be scientists’ next big find : Short Wave
Microbes are little alchemists that perform all manner of chemical reactions. A team of microbiologists co-founded a non-profit to try to harness those abilities to solve some of the world’s big problems — from carbon capture to helping coral reefs to cleaning up waste. Recently, the team turned their attention to the microbes living in people’s homes — on and in shower heads, drip pans, and hot water heaters. These rather extreme environments may have pressured microorganisms into surviving in ways that could be advantageous to humans. Science reporter Ari Daniel takes us on a treasure hunt in miniature.This episode was produced by Hannah Chinn. It was edited by Rebecca Ramirez. Tyler Jones checked the facts. The audio engineer was Robert Rodriguez.Interested in learning more about the weird and wonderful world of microbes? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.
‘Smart’ diabetes probiotic; China’s missile AI tracker: 7 science highlights
From a proposed South China Sea robotic fortress to HIV cases at Wuhan port, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
AB Science reports completion of the step 3 of phase 1, evaluating the combination of AB8939 with venetoclax for the treatment of refractory or relapsed AML
PRESS RELEASE AB SCIENCE REPORTS COMPLETION OF THE STEP 3 OF PHASE 1, EVALUATING THE COMBINATION OF AB8939 WITH VENETOCLAX FOR THE TREATMENT OF REFRACTORY OR RELAPSED ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA THE COMBINATION OF AB8939 WITH VENETOCLAX GENERATED A 67% OVERALL RESPONSE RATE (ORR) AND A 100% DISEASE CONTROL RATE (DCR), WITH NO DOSE-LIMITING TOXICITIES (DLT) OBSERVED, IN A POOR-PROGNOSIS POPULATION WITH ADVERSE GENETICS TREATED IN THE SECOND - TO FOURTH-LINE RELAPSED OR REFRACTORY SETTING Paris, June 2
Chip prodigy returns to China, hybrid crop grown in desert: 7 science highlights
From the world’s first parallel processor to doubts over Elon Musk’s Starship, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
China’s tech war warriors; trying to jam Starlink signals: 7 science highlights
From a chief scientist’s detention to a revealing DNA discovery, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
A note to readers: Science, accountability and elections
Dear readers, As early voting begins, I wanted to share some news — and why it connects to the decisions we make at the ballot box. I’ve been selected for the inaugural cohort of the South Atlantic Climate Journalism Hub mentorship program, hosted by Covering Climate Now. I’m excited to join this group, learn from scientists and fellow journalists, and expand my science reporting. Science directly ties to governance. Local officials make decisions about where development goes, how infrastructure is maintained, what emergency preparations receive funding, and how communities rebuild after disasters. Understanding the evidence behind those decisions helps us evaluate whether our government is serving us well. Here in western North Carolina, those connections are all around us, in Lake Lure and beyond. Flood maps inform decisions about property and development. Engineering assessments help identify risks at dams and bridges. Rainfall forecasts guide emergency preparations. Geological information helps explain landslide hazards. Water testing gives communities information they need to assess conditions. Meteorologists’ knowledge and public perception of weather events shape public safety. Each involves scientific or technical knowledge. Each also raises questions about public responsibility: What did officials know? How did they use that information? What did they tell the public? What did taxpayers receive for their money? A study can identify a problem. Elected officials still have to decide what to do about it, how to pay for it, and how to explain their choices. Reporting should examine both the evidence and the response. That is where I want to strengthen my work. My reporting on Helene recovery, infrastructure, flooding, public safety, and public spending has repeatedly brought me to questions that require scientific expertise alongside public records. This mentorship may help me better understand the research, ask more precise questions, and explain the answers clearly. I also bring the perspective of someone living with these concerns. I live downstream of Lake Lure Dam, and landslides affected my property during Helene. Those experiences bring urgency to my questions. Careful reporting helps establish the answers. Readers deserve to know what the evidence shows, where uncertainty remains, and whether officials accurately describe the information guiding their decisions. You also deserve scrutiny of proposed solutions: what they cost, what they are expected to accomplish, and what risks remain. Access to that information matters. As a mostly deaf journalist who relies on written communication, I will continue pressing for written public warnings, records, and explanations that people can read and use in real time. As you consider the candidates seeking your vote, consider how they approach evidence, preparedness, and transparency. Do they support local journalism, even when it’s not parroting a press release? Do they explain weather events clearly in plain English and explain their decisions after them? Make supporting records available? Acknowledge uncertainty? Follow through when a report identifies a risk? Those are practical questions about governing. Thank you for supporting Cops & Congress and the work that makes these questions part of the public conversation. I’m grateful to David Dickson and the CC Now team for this opportunity, and I look forward to bringing what I learn back to you. Annie DanceEditor & Publisher, Cops & Congress — Learn more about this newsletter, ethics policy, how you can help shape this work, and support it. Follow on X and Facebook. Send constructive criticism, fan mail, and tips with public documents for future stories: CopsandCongress@gmail.com ICYMI: View the Cops & Congress archive — Annie Dance is the publisher of Cops & Congress, a newsletter that analyzes what happens when crime, courts, disaster, democracy, and small-town policies collide. Views expressed here are covered by the First Amendment. Dance has a Bachelor of Arts from Manhattan University in Communication with a focus in Journalism and Government. She has been a journalist for over 20 years. Share Upgrade now or give a gift subscription
Scientist leaves Yale for China, chip researcher’s death: 7 science highlights
From China closer to detecting US nuclear submarines to its jam-proof satellite network, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
The sludge in your shower drain? That could be scientists’ next big find : Short Wave
Microbes are little alchemists that perform all manner of chemical reactions. A team of microbiologists co-founded a non-profit to try to harness those abilities to solve some of the world’s big problems — from carbon capture to helping coral reefs to cleaning up waste. Recently, the team turned their attention to the microbes living in people’s homes — on and in shower heads, drip pans, and hot water heaters. These rather extreme environments may have pressured microorganisms into surviving in ways that could be advantageous to humans. Science reporter Ari Daniel takes us on a treasure hunt in miniature.This episode was produced by Hannah Chinn. It was edited by Rebecca Ramirez. Tyler Jones checked the facts. The audio engineer was Robert Rodriguez.Interested in learning more about the weird and wonderful world of microbes? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.
Is metascience being co-opted?
In July, the White House released a report that argued academia is deeply dysfunctional and in need of radical reform.Science: A New Golden Age sets out a litany of problems many academics will recognise: interminable waits for grants; short-term funding rather than support for longer, more ambitious projects; ballooning administrative requirements; pressure to publish, and many more. “The scientific machine is getting bogged down,” it says. At least on the face of it, Science: A New Golden Age is a triumph for the metascience movement, a loose-knit, global group of academics, philanthropists and think tankers that want far more testing and experimentation in how we fund public research and innovation. The report tells US research funders to set up internal metascience units to do just this. But it has also set alarm bells ringing that metascience is being conveniently deployed to help justify the defunding of US universities, which US vice president JD Vance has openly labelled “the enemy.” “Just because you have an issue with your plumbing in your house doesn't mean you light the entire house on fire and burn it to the ground,” said Colette Delawalla, chief executive of Stand Up for Science, a group campaigning against what it says are attacks on scientists by the Trump administration. No one is arguing that academia doesn’t need reform, but there’s debate over how far and how fast the system should be shaken up. Does public R&D need slow and steady evidence-based adjustment, or radical new experiments?One of the key arguments in Science: A New Golden Age is that there’s not enough funding for what it calls “mid-level” science: engineering-heavy projects that require tens of millions of dollars, involve ten to a hundred people, and last around five years. Such a project might develop a brain-computer interface for people with Alzheimer's disease, for example. As such, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) has already announced $1.5 billion to set up so-called X-Labs, effectively new research organisations to pursue breakthroughs in areas such as quantum sensing and new scientific instruments. Funding divertedBut there’s a catch: this money has squeezed NSF budgets for more traditional, fundamental research grants, Science reported in June, likely meaning less cash for university-based scientists. Science: A New Golden Age also makes various swipes at universities, accusing them of extracting overheads from scientists to fund administrative bloat. “We have become dependent on a narrow set of legacy institutions,” it says. The report doesn’t mention it, but the US government is simultaneously seeking greater powers over federal funding, which would allow political appointees at funding agencies to screen or cancel research grants mid-project. The White House is also seeking to slash the NSF’s budget by more than half in 2027, although similar cuts proposed for 2026 were blocked by Congress. Convenient hookThis has worried some that the metascience agenda could be misused as a kind of smokescreen to further weaken universities. James Wilsdon, executive director of the Research on Research Institute at University College London, said that the report contains lots of “interesting ideas” and agrees that in places, academia is a “pretty broken system.” But the risk is that metascience is being deployed as a “convenient hook” to support cuts and a “political land grab” to transfer grant power from scientists to political appointees in US funding agencies.So far, the metascience agenda hasn’t been seized on by radical right parties in Europe. But Wilsdon worries it will cross the Atlantic, politicising research reform efforts and making them more difficult to carry out. The report is already making some in Europe sceptical of the entire idea. “The system is not without flaws, but the metascience discussion is not likely to improve the system but rather to generate munition to undermine it,” said Claes de Vreese, a professor of AI and society at the University of Amsterdam. Peter Thiel protégéOfficially, Science: A New Golden Age has just one named author: Michael Kratsios, the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and a former chief of staff to Silicon Valley mogul Peter Thiel. He also served as chief financial officer of Thiel’s Clarium Capital Management. Since the 1990s, Thiel has criticised US universities for moving away from teaching what he views as the classic works of western civilisation, and drifting towards “anti-Western zealotry.” And since 2011, he has offered two-year fellowships of $250,000 to young people to skip or drop out of university, and instead start companies or pursue scientific research. “College can be good for learning about what’s been done before, but it can also discourage you from doing something new,” according to the Thiel Fellowships website. In other areas, the Trump administration has promoted academics with a longstanding interest in metascience. For example, the head of the National Institutes of Health, Jay Bhattacharya, in 2020 co-authored a study arguing the funder backs overly conservative proposals, although he achieved wider prominence as a critic of pandemic lockdowns. Careless talk costs fundingEven before the Trump administration embraced the metascience agenda, some metascientists privately wondered whether they should be careful not to overstate dysfunctions in academia, in case this gets used as ammunition against universities. But others think being cautious with criticism is pointless. After all, last year, the Trump administration sought to cut funding from US universities on an entirely different premise: supposed antisemitism on campus. “I don't think these governments need a technical metascientific excuse to attack the universities, they will want to do so anyway,” said Will Stone, a researcher at Science Works, a new think tank advocating for a “metascience revolution” in the UK. “I think researchers should report what they find, even when the findings may be used to advance policies they disagree with,” echoed Russell Funk, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, who in 2023 co-authored a highly influential paper that argued scientific papers were becoming less disruptive over time. No justificationThat said, Funk thinks that metascientific research certainly doesn’t justify a weakening of universities. Instead, scientists need “time, resources and stability to pursue unfamiliar ideas,” he said. “Taking away those conditions works against the very goal the reforms are supposed to achieve.”The Institute for Progress, a Washington DC-based innovation policy think tank that has championed X-Labs and metascience units, also says that reforms should complement, not supplant, universities. “Unpredictable, unreliable, and reduced federal funding to researchers is destabilising to the very foundations of research and development and is bad,” said Jenn Gustetic, the institute’s director of metascience and R&D policy.Evolution or revolution?This points to a much bigger divide in the metascience community: how far and how fast should public R&D be shaken up? Does it need evolution or revolution? For example, Science: A New Golden Age says the science system relies too heavily on traditional “workhorse” project grants, the type that pay out around $250,000 a year to fund “hypothesis-driven science by small teams on tractable questions.” However, in criticising project grants, the report “decisively picks one side of a debate that is far from settled,” David Hilmer Rex, a metascientist based in Denmark, has written. In June, Pierre Azoulay, a metascientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, defended project grants, saying that the alternative of X-Labs “merits scepticism.”A-B testingOne challenge in metascience is that it’s easier to generate evidence for some types of change than others. Most straightforwardly, research funders can run A-B tests on different ways of awarding money. For example, Germany’s Volkswagen Foundation recently trialled distributed peer review, where applicants rate each other’s proposals, and measured its results against traditional review panels. Distributed peer review made quicker decisions, although awarded money to largely different ideas. However, much of the focus of the metascience movement has been on founding fast-moving and free-acting new research organisations and funders, in contrast to the alleged stodginess of mainstream academia or public innovation grants. A culture of speed and freedom are the animating principles behind Germany’s Sprind or the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria).Related articlesViewpoint: it's time to experiment with how Europe funds science European researchers sound the alarm that Trump rule changes will hit cooperationHowever, while it’s possible to closely study previously successful bodies, such as the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), for historical clues to their secret sauce, it’s impossible to guarantee in advance that the likes of Sprind or Aria will actually work as hoped. But advocates of new organisations say this inherent uncertainly shouldn’t stop us trying. “If we wait for definitive proof that something will work before we try it, I don't know where your proof is coming from,” said Stone. Trade-offsUp until now, experiments in metascience haven’t generally come with hard trade-offs over money. In the US, new ideas such as focused research organisations have often been funded by billionaire philanthropists. In Europe, new innovation agencies such as Sprind and Aria, or the Netherland’s new National Agency for Disruptive Innovation, haven’t needed explicit cuts elsewhere in the research system. But with the $1.5 billion establishment of X-Labs by the NSF, the trade-offs are becoming clearer. Some metascientists privately wonder whether a smaller pilot would have been more appropriate, given that the idea is untested. The Institute for Progress counters that the $1.5 billion X-Labs budget is spread out over a decade, so will account for less than 2% of the NSF’s annual budget. “It’s important to remember that [Darpa] was once an institutional experiment as well. Now it’s one of the most cited innovative funding models in the world,” said Gustetic.As for Europe?The US isn’t the only country placing metascience at the heart of its research strategy. Science: A New Golden Age looks admiringly at the UK, which in 2024 set up a Metascience Unit to scrutinise how it funds research. In Brussels, it’s more of a mixed picture. In 2018, the EU set up the European Innovation Council to funnel grants and equity to start-ups, although it’s sometimes criticised for awarding money too slowly. Recently, the council has started experimenting with challenges, where teams of inventors compete to overcome a technological challenge. The European Commission also wants to experiment with partially randomising grant winners, to cut down on bureaucracy. However, the Commission’s own advisers have said the EU’s own research schemes are too conventional. They want the Commission to establish a new dedicated unit to scrutinise and experiment with funding. But there’s no sign of a such unit emerging in Brussels’ plans for the next Horizon Europe programme, which from 2028 is set to distribute more than €160 billion over seven years. Sam Bogerd, director of breakthrough innovation at the Brussels-based Arq Foundation, an AI-focused think tank that also looks at metascience, says that Europe might have the opposite problem to the US: universities and basic research funding are still reasonably well supported, but there’s not enough experimentation. “We're not taking a close enough look at where this money can achieve the most, and I am worried that the good ideas around metascience will be tainted politically by their association with the Trump administration,” he said. He’s still lobbying for the Commission to set up an experimental unit. But in the meantime, the Arq Foundation plans to do its own research, and is currently hiring two metascience researchers to run the rule over how Brussels spends research funding.
Why is trust in science important?
STAT's Alex Hogan sits down for an in-depth conversation with our new trust-in-science reporter, Nicholas Florko, on the latest episode of STATus Report.
‘Gold factory’ relic, Chinese plant cuts 60% energy use: 7 science highlights
From an artificial pancreas to a cancer trial with 84 per cent efficacy, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
The Preliminary Lunar Science Report for Artemis II is out
On April 1, 2026, the crew of the Artemis II mission launched into space atop NASA's Space Launch System (SLS). Roughly 3 1/2 hours after launch, the rocket's upper stage separated from the Orion spacecraft ...
How China cracked US ‘super code’, health benefits of lard: 7 science highlights
From China building world’s largest smart transformer to health benefits of lard, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Mirror cells could threaten life on Earth. Why are we building them?
For people with two hands, one is usually dominant. On a molecular level, earthly life takes this to the extreme. All of the DNA in living things twists to the right, whereas the protein building blocks favor a kind of left-handed chemistry.The rules of life are based on this chemistry.In recent years, scientists have worked toward a kind of mirror version of life. Currently, the technology doesn't exist to make mirror life at the cellular level — and likely won't for at least a decade. Still, a group of scientists is concerned enough about the possibility that they've published a 299-page technical report calling for a stop to the science.In this encore episode for our Tech Camp series, host Regina Barber talks to Carl Zimmer, a science reporter at The New York Times, about his reporting on mirror cells — and why creating them could lead to devastating consequences for life on Earth.Check out Carl's full article.Curious about other controversial research? Email us at shortwave@npr.org.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show’s perks include sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.
Award-winning health and science reporter explores midlife momentum
A midlife moment sparked a new assignment for NPR's Alison Aubrey: Find women who were thrilled about midlife. Ask them their secrets. Study the research. Write a book about it.
Why is trust in science important?
STAT's Alex Hogan sits down for an in-depth conversation with our new trust-in-science reporter, Nicholas Florko, on the latest episode of STATus Report.
Five ways NOAA scientists helped improve human and marine life in 2025
Our 2025 NOAA Science Report focuses on advancements that contribute to NOAA’s robust research and development enterprise, help reduce the impacts of hazardous weather, and promote sustainable use and stewardship of ocean and coastal resources.
Experts from over 70 countries to contribute to eight edition of the
UNESCO has selected over 150 experts to contribute to the eighth edition of the UNESCO Science Report, marking an important milestone in the preparation of the Organization's flagship assessment of
Award-winning health and science reporter explores midlife momentum
A midlife moment sparked a new assignment for NPR's Allison Aubrey: Find women who were thrilled about midlife. Ask them their secrets. Study the research. Write a book about it.
White House Plan for a ‘Golden Age’ of Science Ignores the Structures That Made the US a Scientific Superpower
New White House science report calls for reform. Will it spark a new golden age or weaken institutions behind U.S. scientific leadership?
Babies in space; China’s first Fields Medal winners: 7 science highlights
From China’s plans on its Great Green Wall to having babies in space, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
China builds first ‘coal battery’, war on Alzheimer’s: 7 science highlights
From a zero emission ‘coal battery’ to China’s war on Alzheimer’s, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
White House Science Report Calls For Reducing University Research Funding
A White House report calls for reduced funding for universities and argues that the government should re-allocate much of the money to the “individual scientist” instead.
AI is Changing Science: Here’s What Journalists Need to Know
Researchers are rapidly adopting AI for everything from data analysis to planning and executing entire research studies. Journalists will need to keep up. That means learning the basic principles, strengths, and weaknesses of the diverse technologies labeled as “AI”—and how to tell when using AI in science is actually noteworthy. Luckily for science reporters, knowing your beat well can help you cut through the hype.
China-Nepal floods; ‘Asian water tower’ wobbling: 7 science highlights
From Beijing’s bid to stop US AI dominance to impact of China-Nepal floods, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Award-winning health and science reporter explores midlife momentum
A midlife moment sparked a new assignment for NPR's Allison Aubrey: Find women who were thrilled about midlife. Ask them their secrets. Study the research. Write a book about it.
China’s next-gen stealth fighters, bad cholesterol drug: 7 science highlights
From oil refining with reduced energy use to a self-powered neural device, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Chinese civilisation’s true age; engineer heads to China: 7 science highlights
From China’s world-first microwave weapon to a fourth ‘Shenlong’ mission, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
China’s glueball ‘triumph’; SpaceX rocket debris on video: 7 science highlights
From China’s plan against desertification to nuking a ‘doomsday asteroid’, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
PLA’s plan on US carriers; world’s largest whale graveyard: 7 science highlights
From a Chinese firm releasing images of Nvidia and Apple HQs to SpaceX’s IPO, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.
Frog Tinder. Sweet potato milk. N&O science reporter takes you into the wild
Remember when reading about science was fun? Luke Bowles, the N&O’s summer science writer, takes you behind the scenes and into the labs.
Introducing Ideastream's full-time science reporter: Me
Jeff St.Clair steps away from the host chair to become Ideastream's full-time science reporter
Alto Neuroscience Reports Full Year 2025 Financial Results and Recent Business Highlights
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., March 16, 2026--Alto Neuroscience, Inc. ("Alto") (NYSE: ANRO), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of novel precision medicines for neuropsychiatric disorders, today reported financial results for the full year ended December 31, 2025, and highlighted recent progress across its pipeline of clinical-stage product candidates.
Digital Science Report Examines Federal Research Security Policies
Digital Science issued a report that looks into whether current federal research security policies adequately account for visiting scholars and other short-term researchers. ...
What crocodile bones teach us about dinosaurs
Paleontologists have often determined how old a dinosaur was by counting the growth rings in its bones. Just like with trees, it was thought that each ring corresponded to a single year of age. But researchers who studied crocodiles at an outdoor recreation center near Cape Town appear to have poked a hole in that approach. In the crocodiles, which are some of the closest living relatives of dinosaurs, there was more than one growth ring laid down per year. The results contribute to a growing debate over the best way to age animals.Read more of freelance science reporter Ari Daniel’s story here.Interested in more on the future of science? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.
A navigator for better science reporting
Science touches nearly every beat in local journalism, yet many reporters lack the training or time to confidently navigate complex scientific topics. In this piece, Bob Sillick explains how The Open Notebook, in partnership with the Reynolds Journalism Institute, has launched the Science Reporting Navigator to close that gap. The new tool aims to help local journalists spot misinformation, understand research and bring scientific clarity to their daily reporting.
Girl, 6, Died After Experimental Gene-Editing Treatment in China: Science
A young girl died after receiving an experimental gene-editing treatment in a clinical trial in Shanghai, Science reported, raising questions about regulatory oversight and transparency as China rapidly expands its biotechnology ambitions.
Stories That Stuck With Us This Year, Handpicked by the KQED Science Team
Our science reporters recount stories they found especially memorable, thought-provoking or that changed how they thought about something.
EU’s tech ban; China’s mysterious Nantianmen project: 7 science highlights
From a leading biologist leaving US for China to a semiconductor breakthrough, here are some highlights from SCMP’s recent science reporting.