Science
Killing 166 million birds hasn’t helped poultry farmers stop H5N1. Is there a better way?
When the deadly H5N1 bird flu virus made its first appearance at a U.S. poultry farm in February 2022, roughly 29,000 turkeys at an Indiana facility were sacrificed in an attempt to avert a larger outbreak.
It didn’t work. Three years later, highly pathogenic avian influenza has spread to all 50 states. The number of commercial birds that have died or been killed exceeds 166 million and the price of eggs is at an all-time high.
Poultry producers, infectious disease experts and government officials now concede that H5N1 is likely here to stay. That recognition is prompting some of them to question whether the long-standing practice of culling every single bird on an infected farm is sustainable over the long-term.
Instead, they are discussing such strategies as targeted depopulation, vaccinations, and even the relocation of wetlands and bodies of water to lure virus-carrying wild birds away from poultry farms.
But each of these alternatives entails a variety of logistical, economic and environmental costs that may eclipse the intended savings.
“People talk about common-sense solutions to bird flu,” said Dr. Maurice Pitesky, a veterinarian and commercial poultry expert at UC Davis. “But that’s what mass culling is. There’s a reason we’ve been doing it: It’s common sense.”
The current version of the bird flu — known as H5N1 2.3.4.4b — is both highly contagious and highly lethal. It has has plowed through the nation’s commercial chickens, turkeys and ducks with a mortality rate of nearly 100%.
“There’s a reason why they call it ‘highly pathogenic avian influenza,’” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan’s Vaccine and Infectious Disease Research Organization. “It just goes straight through a flock like a hot knife through butter.”
And it’s why most researchers and veterinarians promote mass culling, describing it as humane and cost-effective.
A natural death from H5N1 is not pleasant for a chicken, said Rasmussen. The virus produces a gastrointestinal infection, so the birds wind up dying of diarrhea along with respiratory distress.
“It’s like Ebola without the hemorrhage,” she said.
Sparing birds that don’t look sick is a gamble. They may be infected and able to spread the virus through their poop before they have any outward signs of illness. The only way to know for sure is to test each bird individually — an expensive and time-consuming prospect. And if even a single infected bird is missed, it can spread the virus to an entire flock of replacements, Rasmussen said.
Besides, she said, all of the extra work that would go into making sure some chickens can stay alive would only drive up labor costs and ultimately make eggs more expensive.
It also has the potential to increase the total amount of virus on farms, which is dangerous for human poultry workers, said Dr. Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health.
“One of the reasons to cull early is that you don’t want a lot of bird-human exposures,” he said. “The more infections we introduce to humans, the more mutations we’re going to see that increase the risk for a broader epidemic or pandemic.”
For all of these reasons, international trade agreements require mass culling — also known as “stamping out” — so that importers don’t get a side of H5N1 with their poultry, said Dr. Carol Cardona, a veterinarian and avian influenza researcher at the University of Minnesota.
That’s not the only financial incentive for mass culling. The USDA reimburses farmers for eggs and birds that have to be killed to contain an outbreak, but not for birds that die of the flu.
Yet at times, this has meant killing more than 4.2 million birds, most of which may have been healthy.
Bill Mattos, president of the California Poultry Federation, said a more targeted approach could be feasible when all birds are not living under the same roof. In California, for instance, farms that raise broiler chickens typically operate multiple stand-alone buildings with separate ventilation systems, entryways and exits.
Biosecurity measures like these can keep pathogens from spreading between barns, Cardona said. Risks could be reduced further by requiring workers to change their clothes and boots when moving from barn to barn, or by assigning workers to a single barn, she said.
But others, including Dr. John Korslund, a veterinarian and former USDA researcher, are skeptical that such a practice could work, considering the virulence of H5N1.
“Chickens are infected and shedding virus very early, before evidence of clinical illness,” Korslund said. “Odds are that ‘healthy’ buildings on infected premises are in reality in the early stages of incubating infections,” he said.
While it was possible some buildings might remain virus free, and some birds could be salvaged, the downsides of this approach are huge, Korsland said. “A lot of additional virus will be put into the environment,” he said.
Indeed, flu particles from one facility can escape exhaust fans and travel great distances, said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. Studies have shown that “the movement of virus from farm to farm was associated with wind direction and speed,” he said.
Bird flu vaccines may offer some protection. Both China and France use them, and the USDA granted a conditional license this month for an H5N2 vaccine designed for chickens, according to Zoetis, the company that developed it.
While some are heralding vaccines as a potential tool to inoculate the nation’s poultry farms, others say the costs could be too much.
Most U.S. trade partners are not keen to import poultry products from countries that vaccinate their birds due to concerns that the shots can mask the presence of the virus. And most will blackball a nation’s entire poultry portfolio, even if just one region or type of poultry is infected.
The U.S. exports more than 6.7 billion pounds of chicken meat each year, second only to Brazil, according to the National Chicken Council. So as long as foreign buyers are resistant to vaccination, the shots probably won’t be deployed even if egg-laying hens are getting wiped out by the virus.
As members of the U.S. Congressional and Senate Chicken Caucuses wrote in a letter this month to the USDA, “if an egg-laying hen in Michigan is vaccinated for HPAI, the U.S. right now would likely be unable to export an unvaccinated broiler chicken from Mississippi.”
The new H5N2 vaccine might allay such concerns. While it would offer protection against H5N1, it would elicit antibodies that look distinct from the ones that arise from an actual infection, Cardona said.
Pitesky said that none of these measures will work if we don’t do a better job with flu surveillance and farm placement.
Wildlife and agriculture officials should ramp up their testing of wild birds to determine where the virus is moving and how it is evolving, he said. That will require global coordination because infected birds can travel back and forth between the U.S., Canada, Russia, East Asia and Europe.
Poultry farms near ponds, lagoons or wetlands that attract wild birds should be on high alert during migration season, Pitesky said. Farmers should use apps such as eBird, BirdCast or the Waterfowl Alert Network to keep tabs on when the birds are nearby so they can step up their biosecurity measures as needed, he said.
It may be possible to lure wild birds away from agricultural facilities by bolstering wetlands in more remote areas, he said.
“I keep pushing the idea of starting to reflood some of those wetlands, but we haven’t done it in any kind of strategic fashion,” Pitesky said.
The idea makes sense, but has been brushed off as “pie in the sky, which I push back on,” he said. “I’m like, what we’re doing right now is obviously not working.”
Science
Pace of N.I.H. Funding Slows Further in Trump’s Second Year
Spending on new medical research by the National Institutes of Health has fallen roughly $1 billion behind the pace of years past, delaying thousands of scientific projects and raising concerns within the agency that it may struggle to pay out the money it was allotted by Congress.
Instead of canceling grants en masse, as the N.I.H. did in the first year of this Trump presidency, it is now vetting them before approval with a “computational text analysis tool” that scans for terms including “racism,” “gender” and “vaccination refusal,” according to documents obtained by The New York Times.
That tool was meant to formalize a campaign against “woke science” that was initiated last year by the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency.
But the screening system is now exacerbating a slowdown in research spending: The N.I.H. awarded only about 1,900 new and competitive grants from October to late March, less than half the number it tended to give out by that point in the fiscal year during the Biden administration, an analysis by The Times showed.
The heaviest damage to the grantmaking apparatus was done by the protracted government shutdown in the fall, which delayed grant review meetings by months. The N.I.H. has struggled to catch up, and delays are affecting fields far beyond those ostensibly targeted by the administration’s crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion.
As of late March, for example, the National Cancer Institute had earmarked only about $72 million for new and competitive research grants, less than one-third of the nearly $250 million it had agreed to spend by that point in a typical fiscal year during the Biden administration, according to The Times’s analysis.
“It means that people get fired because there is uncertainty about whether the grant will come through,” said Dr. Joshua Gordon, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University and a former director of the National Institute of Mental Health. “It means budgets get busted. It means research projects get stalled.”
However alarming the canceled grants and spending delays were last year, Dr. Gordon said, “I’m more worried this year.”
The Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the N.I.H. and is led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has become involved this year in flagging certain grant awards and stopping their release, according to emails reviewed by The Times.
Mr. Kennedy faced sharp criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike over N.I.H. spending delays in congressional hearings this week. He is set to appear at two more hearings on Wednesday.
The N.I.H. has fallen behind in part because it lost thousands of workers last year to layoffs and early retirements. In some branches of the agency, what workers remain can barely keep up with renewing existing grants, much less awarding new ones.
One N.I.H. institute has less than half of the workers needed to vet grants for legal and financial compliance, employees were told at a recent meeting, notes from which were reviewed by The Times.
Under the most dire projections, the institute could leave $500 million of congressionally appropriated funding on the table because of difficulties processing grants, N.I.H. officials said at that meeting. They were temporarily deploying career scientists to what were effectively business roles to speed up grant awards.
The N.I.H. director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, has said that he is trying to root out ideologically motivated and insufficiently rigorous science. Conservatives accuse the N.I.H. of having fostered such research during the Obama and Biden presidencies by, for example, encouraging grant proposals on sexual- and gender-minority groups.
“Scientists will no longer have to mouth D.E.I. shibboleths to garner funding,” Dr. Bhattacharya and his top deputy wrote in an online article in December, the day before the N.I.H. outlined the new screening process to its employees.
Andrew Nixon, a health department spokesman, blamed the spending shortfall on “the Democrat-led shutdown,” which he said “delayed N.I.H.’s ability to issue grants” at the start of the fiscal year. Since then, he said, “timelines have returned to typical funding patterns.”
He added that the agency “uses a variety of review tools to ensure alignment with agency priorities” and that it was working to hire additional employees. “The N.I.H. intends to obligate all appropriated funds, as directed by Congress,” he said.
To understand why spending has slowed so dramatically at the N.I.H., the world’s premier funder of medical research, The Times interviewed 10 agency employees and reviewed internal documents, including spreadsheets of grants flagged by the screening tool and the list of roughly 235 terms it searches for.
The employees spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.
The documents painted a picture of an agency whose leaders were seeking to exert greater control over scientific spending by, among other things, deciding whether certain grants were compatible with agency priorities. But in clamping down on the funding process, the N.I.H. created new choke points, leaving some proposals in limbo for days or weeks.
That has frustrated some senior N.I.H. officials, one of whom lamented in an email seen by The Times that it was taking too long to rework grant proposals. The official asked his staff to simply strip the proposals of disfavored terms instead.
The delays have also angered lawmakers. Congress sets the country’s medical research spending levels, even as the administration has leeway to prioritize types of studies. And despite Mr. Trump’s proposing major cuts last year, Congress preserved the N.I.H. budget at roughly $47 billion for 2026.
“It is very frustrating to understand that this administration can circumvent dollars that were designated for our scientists,” said Senator Angela Alsobrooks, Democrat of Maryland.
Congress’s budget buoyed American scientists. By late 2025, many believed that they had weathered the worst of Trump-era funding problems. The N.I.H. spent aggressively toward the end of the last fiscal year, overcoming earlier blockages and delays.
The Supreme Court also let stand a lower court’s ruling that the policy behind the cancellation of more than $780 million in N.I.H. grants was probably unlawful, a victory for groups that had argued the terminations were arbitrary and capricious.
But the Trump administration was preparing a far more systematic crackdown on what it saw as unreliable research.
In August, Dr. Bhattacharya publicly outlined the agency’s new priorities, including opposition to “research based on ideologies that promote differential treatment of people based on race or ethnicity,” a template that could be used to guide grant reviews.
Then, in December, the N.I.H. introduced its employees to the “computational text analysis tool,” allowing the agency to comb through new grant proposals and existing projects for phrases suggesting a grant “may not align with N.I.H. priorities,” a guidance document would later tell employees.
Roger Severino, a vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation and a health official in the first Trump administration, said that weeding out such grants was necessary to rid the N.I.H. of the “politicization” of the Obama and Biden eras.
If the result was less spending on science, he said, that was only because the agency had been wasting money.
“There was a tremendous amount of bloat that grew up like barnacles on the N.I.H. research ship,” Mr. Severino said. “Those barnacles are being scraped off.”
Within some divisions of the N.I.H., the text search tool is flagging as many as half of grants, officials said, requiring staff scientists to extensively document how they will be reworked or why they already conform to agency priorities.
Flagged grants address cancer, diabetes, autoimmune diseases, H.I.V., heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, nutrition and prenatal care, internal documents show.
In part because many of them look at the use of screenings or treatments, they sometimes include mention of “inequities” in access to care or “minority” groups who disproportionately suffer from a disease, causing the system to deem the grants not “clean.”
In one case, a biological science grant was held up for a week because the proposal had used “sex” interchangeably with “gender,” a flagged word.
American scientists already spend some 40 percent of their time on grant-related administrative tasks. Now they are being deluged by ever more paperwork, said Dr. Michael Lauer, who led external grantmaking at the N.I.H. until last year.
And because the N.I.H. is awarding grants to far fewer researchers this year, the chances of success have rarely been lower.
“This is lost time for all of us,” Dr. Lauer said. “Instead of spending their time doing science and hopefully making discoveries that will make us all healthier, they’re rewriting grant applications.”
Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting.
Methodology
The Times analyzed N.I.H. grants data from N.I.H. RePORTER for the fiscal years 2021 through 2026. The analysis excludes awards for intramural research conducted at the N.I.H. Clinical Center. The analysis focuses on new awards (Type 1 awards) and competitive renewals (Types 2, 4 and 9).
The analysis uses data through March 2026, the most recent month comparable to prior years. Previous records suggest that the data available on RePORTER for that month, however, may still be missing up to 10 percent of awards. The analysis accounts for that possibility.
Science
Lyrids Meteor Shower: How to Watch, Peak Time and Weather Forecast
Our universe might be chock-full of cosmic wonder, but you can observe only a fraction of astronomical phenomena with the naked eye. Meteor showers, natural fireworks that streak brightly across the night sky, are one of them.
The latest observable meteor shower will be the Lyrids, which has been active since April 14 and is forecast to continue through April 30. The shower reaches its peak April 21 to 22, or Tuesday night into Wednesday morning.
According to NASA, the Lyrids are one of the oldest known meteor showers, and have been enjoyed by stargazers for nearly 3,000 years. Their bright, speedy streaks are caused by the dusty debris from a comet named Thatcher. They appear to spring from the constellation Lyra, which right now can be seen in the eastern sky at night in the Northern Hemisphere.
The moon will be about 27 percent full tonight, appearing as a thick crescent in the sky, according to the American Meteor Society.
To get a hint at when to best watch for the Lyrids, you can use this tool, which relies on data from the Global Meteor Network. It shows fireball activity levels in real time.
And while you gaze at the heavens, keep an eye out for other stray meteors streaking across the night sky. Skywatchers are reporting that the amount of fireballs is double what is usually seen by this point in the year.
Where meteor showers come from
There is a chance you might see a meteor on any given night, but you are most likely to catch one during a shower. Meteor showers are caused by Earth passing through the rubble trailing a comet or asteroid as it swings around the sun. This debris, which can be as small as a grain of sand, leaves behind a glowing stream of light as it burns up in Earth’s atmosphere.
Meteor showers occur around the same time every year and can last for days or weeks. But there is only a small window when each shower is at its peak, which happens when Earth reaches the densest part of the cosmic debris. The peak is the best time to look for a shower. From our point of view on Earth, the meteors will appear to come from the same point in the sky.
The Perseid meteor shower, for example, peaks in mid-August from the constellation Perseus. The Geminids, which occur every December, radiate from the constellation Gemini.
How to watch a meteor shower
Michelle Nichols, the director of public observing at the Adler Planetarium in Chicago, recommends forgoing the use of telescopes or binoculars while watching a meteor shower.
“You just need your eyes and, ideally, a dark sky,” she said.
That’s because meteors can shoot across large swaths of the sky, so observing equipment can limit your field of view.
Some showers are strong enough to produce up to 100 streaks an hour, according to the American Meteor Society, though you probably won’t see that many.
“Almost everybody is under a light-polluted sky,” Ms. Nichols said. “You may think you’re under a dark sky, but in reality, even in a small town, you can have bright lights nearby.”
Planetariums, local astronomy clubs or even maps like this one can help you figure out where to go to escape excessive light. The best conditions for catching a meteor shower are a clear sky with no moon or cloud cover, sometime between midnight and sunrise. (Moonlight affects visibility in the same way as light pollution, washing out fainter sources of light in the sky.) Make sure to give your eyes at least 30 minutes to adjust to seeing in the dark.
Ms. Nichols also recommends wearing layers, even during the summer. “You’re going to be sitting there for quite a while, watching,” she said. “It’s going to get chilly, even in August.”
Bring a cup of cocoa or tea for even more warmth. Then lie back, scan the sky and enjoy the show.
Where weather is least likely to affect your view
Storm systems sweep across the country in early spring, and some will be obscuring skies tonight. But there will still be plenty of areas with clear skies, particularly in parts of the central United States.
“The best spot is going to be in the Upper Midwest,” said Rich Bann, a meteorologist with the Weather Prediction Center.
Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa will offer especially good sky-viewing weather and a beach on the Great Lakes could be a nice spot to look up at the stars.
But don’t expect to view the show from Chicago, as Illinois could see some thunderstorms. The weather will be better in the Northern and Central Plains, particularly the eastern Dakotas.
High, wispy clouds are expected over the Ohio and Tennessee Valleys and into parts of the Mid-Atlantic. But, Mr. Bann said, “you may be able to see some shooting stars through thin clouds.”
Clouds will be draped across much of the Southeast and the Northeast, though there could be some clearing in Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas and Virginia. Remember, the meteors could be visible all night long. If you look outside and see clouds, try again later.
Catching the spectacle will be challenging across much of the West, particularly from Washington into Northern California, where a storm system is bringing rain and snow. That system will move east overnight.
There are likely to be some pockets of clear skies at times across southern Nevada, northwest Arizona and southwest Utah, Mr. Bann said.
Amy Graff contributed reporting.
Science
FBI probes cases of missing or dead scientists, including four from the L.A. area
WASHINGTON — Amid growing national security concerns, the FBI said Tuesday that it has launched a broad investigation in the deaths or disappearances of at least 10 scientists and staff connected to highly sensitive research, including four from the Los Angeles area.
“The FBI is spearheading the effort to look for connections into the missing and deceased scientists. We are working with the Department of Energy, Department of War, and with our state and state and local law enforcement partners to find answers,” the agency said in a statement.
The FBI’s announcement comes after the House Oversight Committee announced that it would investigate reports of the disappearance and deaths of the scientists, sending letters seeking information from the agencies involved in the federal inquiry as well as NASA, which owns the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge, where three of the missing or dead scientists worked.
“If the reports are accurate, these deaths and disappearances may represent a grave threat to U.S. national security and to U.S. personnel with access to scientific secrets,” Reps. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the committee, and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) wrote in the letters.
President Trump told reporters last week that he had been briefed on the missing and dead scientists, which he described as “pretty serious stuff.” He said at the time that he expected answers on whether the deaths were connected “in the next week and a half.”
Michael David Hicks, who studied comets and asteroids at JPL, was the first of the scientists who disappeared or died. He died on July 30, 2023, at the age of 59. No cause of death was disclosed.
A year later, JPL physicist Frank Maiwald died at 61, with no cause of death disclosed.
Two other Los Angeles scientists are part of the string of deaths and disappearances.
On June 22, 2025, Monica Jacinto Reza, a materials scientist at JPL, disappeared while on a hike near Mt. Waterman in the San Gabriel Mountains.
On Feb. 16, Caltech astrophysicist Carl Grillmair was fatally shot on the porch of his Llano home. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department arrested Freddy Snyder, 29, in connection with the shooting. Snyder had been arrested in December on suspicion of trespassing on Grillmair’s property.
Snyder has been charged with murder.
There is no evidence at this point that the deaths and disappearances, which occurred over a span of four years, are connected.
A spokesperson for NASA, which owns JPL, said in a statement on X that the agency is “coordinating and cooperating with the relevant agencies in relation to the missing scientists.
“At this time, nothing related to NASA indicates a national security threat,” agency spokesperson Bethany Stevens wrote. “The agency is committed to transparency and will provide more information as able.”
Representatives from Caltech, which manages JPL, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
-
World9 minutes agoNaomi Watts to Star as Ballerina Margot Fonteyn in Romantic Drama ‘Margot & Rudi,’ With WestEnd Films Selling in Cannes
-
News15 minutes agoCalifornia Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell
-
Politics21 minutes agoVideo: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
-
Business27 minutes agoOil Prices Rise as Investors Weigh Cease-Fire Extension
-
Science33 minutes agoPace of N.I.H. Funding Slows Further in Trump’s Second Year
-
Health39 minutes agoAging in Place: How Technology Might Help You Grow Old at Home
-
Culture51 minutes agoBook Review: ‘Israel: What Went Wrong?,’ by Omer Bartov
-
Lifestyle57 minutes agoStreet Style Look of the Week: Airy Beachy Clothes