Connect with us

Science

Trump Killed a Major Report on Nature. They’re Trying to Publish It Anyway.

Published

on

Trump Killed a Major Report on Nature. They’re Trying to Publish It Anyway.

The draft was almost ready for submission, due in less than a month. More than 150 scientists and other experts had collectively spent thousands of hours working on the report, a first-of-its-kind assessment of nature across the United States.

But President Trump ended the effort, started under the Biden administration, by executive order. So, on Jan. 30, the project’s director, an environmental scientist named Phil Levin, sent an email telling members of his team that their work had been discontinued.

But it wasn’t the only email he sent that day.

“This work is too important to die,” Dr. Levin wrote in a separate email to the reports’ authors, this one from his personal account. “The country needs what we are producing.”

Now key experts who worked on the report, called the National Nature Assessment, are figuring out how to finish and publish it outside the government, according to interviews with nine of the leading authors.

Advertisement

“There’s an amazingly unanimous broad consensus that we ought to carry on with the work,” said Howard Frumkin, a professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Washington School of Public Health who was leading a chapter on nature’s effects on human health and well-being.

The study was intended to measure how the nation’s lands, water and wildlife are faring, how they are expected to change, and what that means for people.

Most of the 12 chapters were written by teams of a dozen or so specialists. While some were federal employees, a vast majority of the authors came from outside government — academia, nonprofit groups and the private sector — and they were already volunteering their time. Most or all the teams were expecting to continue their work, the authors said.

The first completed draft had been due Feb. 11. When the researchers were told the project had been canceled, some had almost finished their chapters and were simply polishing. Others had been racing against the deadline.

Rajat Panwar, a professor of responsible and sustainable business at Oregon State University who was leading the chapter on nature and the economy, was preparing slides to present his section when he got the news. He said the team he recruited saw, and still sees, the work as a calling to help solve one of its generation’s most pressing problems, the loss of nature and biodiversity.

Advertisement

“The dependence of the economy on nature,” a theme explored in his group’s 6,000-word chapter, “is understated and understudied and underappreciated,” Dr. Panwar said.

But the effort to publish outside the government raised major questions that are under discussion. What is the best way to publish? How will the authors ensure rigor and peer-review? Who is their target audience? Since federal employees will not be able to continue, who will pay for certain critical coordinating roles? Who will provide the oversight that came from a federal steering committee?

And perhaps the trickiest question: How can the report maintain the stature and the influence of a government assessment now that it won’t be released by the government?

“We just want to make sure that whatever product is produced really has the potential to move the needle on the conversations, all the way from the dinner table in individual families to the halls of Congress,” said Chris Field, director of the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University, who was leading the chapter on nature and climate change.

Legal issues related to ownership of the work should not be a problem, said Peter Lee, a professor of law at the University of California, Davis, who specializes in intellectual property law and was not involved in the effort.

Advertisement

“As a general rule, government works are not subject to copyright,” Mr. Lee said.

The draft was developed under the auspices of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the same federal group that oversees national climate assessments. But while those reports are mandated by Congress, the nature assessment received authority through an executive order issued by President Biden.

That left the project more vulnerable. It became one of a slew of Biden-era environmental orders that Mr. Trump revoked on his first day in office. Mr. Trump has also frozen climate spending, begun withdrawing the United States from the main global pact to tackle climate change and launched an assault on wind energy while seeking to expand fossil fuels.

By the end of January, the federal web page for the National Nature Assessment had been taken down.

“Nature supports our economy, our health and well-being, national security and safety from fire and floods,” said Dr. Levin, the former director of the report. “The loss of the National Nature Assessment means that we’re losing important information that we need to ensure that nature and people thrive.”

Advertisement

Dr. Levin declined to comment on the report’s future.

The Trump administration did not address questions about why it canceled the effort. But Anna Kelly, a spokeswoman for the White House, said Mr. Trump would “unleash America’s energy potential” and “simultaneously ensure that our nation’s land and water can be enjoyed for generations to come.”

Christopher Schell, an assistant professor of ecology at the University of California, Berkeley, and the lead author of a chapter called “Nature and Equity in the U.S.,” said he believed that a focus on environmental justice made the assessment more of a target for the Trump administration, which has attacked diversity, equity and inclusion programs and placed workers from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Justice on leave.

Biodiversity, the variety of life on Earth, is declining faster than at any time in human history, according to a landmark global scientific assessment. The National Nature Assessment was intended to provide a much more robust picture of the state of play for the United States, the authors said.

Danielle Ignace, an associate professor in the department of forest resources at the University of Minnesota and the lead author of a chapter on the drivers of change in nature, said her team felt the importance of the work more strongly than ever.

Advertisement

“It’s a calling to this cause to see this through,” Dr. Ignace said. “We’re not going to stop.”

Science

A Fish That Hitches Rides Where the Sun Doesn’t Shine

Published

on

A Fish That Hitches Rides Where the Sun Doesn’t Shine

When danger calls, some animals bare their teeth. Others take to the sky, or curl into protective balls. But the remora — a fish that often hitches a ride on larger marine animals like sea turtles, whales and sharks — sometimes follows a less dignified strategy: It disappears inside a manta ray’s rear end.

In a study published on Monday in the journal Ecology and Evolution, a team of researchers referred to this newly observed behavior as “cloacal diving.” While many questions about this fishy practice remain, there is one thing the team feels sure about.

“It does not look like the manta ray likes it,” said Catherine Macdonald, director of the shark research and conservation program at the University of Miami and senior author of the new study.

While remoras, also known as suckerfish, have been observed diving into the safety of whale-shark cloacae in the past, this is the first time anyone has documented the behavior in manta rays.

The paper uses seven instances of cloacal diving that took place between 2010 and 2025 across all three known species of manta ray. What’s more, the observations, which were gathered by the Marine Megafauna Foundation, occurred in three separate ocean basins, suggesting that this previously unobserved behavior could be common among rays and the remora species that associate with them.

Advertisement

In some cases, the remora forces itself so far inside the ray’s cloaca that only the very tip of its tail can be seen protruding from the exterior. In others, the ray is not large enough to accommodate the remora’s entire body, and half of the suckerfish hangs out of the ray, like a toddler playing peekaboo beneath a blanket.

“The remoras are pretty much as wide as the cloaca is,” said Emily Yeager, a Ph.D. student at the University of Miami and the lead author of the study. “So it’s fully filling that opening.”

To the researchers’ knowledge, no one has studied how sensitive manta ray cloacae are specifically, though Dr. Macdonald said that her lab would often swab the cloacae of sharks for fecal DNA to better understand what they’d been eating.

“They don’t especially like us sticking a swab up there,” she said. “And that swab is a big Q-Tip compared to a remora.”

While all of this may seem as if it’s a lark — News flash: Fish hides inside another fish’s backside — the findings contribute new information to a topic already hotly debated by scientists: the type of impact remoras have on their hosts.

Advertisement

Traditionally, experts have seen the interaction between remoras and manta rays as either commensal or mutualistic. In a commensal relationship, one animal benefits while the other is neither benefited nor harmed. In a mutualistic relationship, both creatures benefit: The remora gets a free ride and food, while the manta has its skin cleaned of parasites.

But cloacal diving almost certainly changes the equation, said Eleanor Caves, a sensory biologist at Brown University who was not affiliated with the new study. While the remora’s presence inside the ray is most likely brief, it could interfere with waste discharge or reproduction, or even damage the cloaca’s lining. This may mean the relationship between remoras and manta rays sometimes tilts into a parasitic interaction, in which one species benefits and the other is harmed.

While the researchers provide just seven instances of remoras using manta-ray cloacae as their own personal panic rooms, the fact that the animals are so difficult to see once inside suggests that the behavior is under-documented, at the very least.

“It’s really challenging to study these highly mobile relationships in marine systems,” Ms. Yeager said. “Oftentimes when researchers interact with these organisms, it’s just for a second in time, when we’re scuba diving in one location and one passes over us, or we’re fishing in a site and we bring one to our boat.”

“But these relationships persist 24/7, all of the time,” she added. “And we’re seeing just a snapshot.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Californian exposed to hantavirus aboard cruise ship resides in Bay Area, officials say

Published

on

Californian exposed to hantavirus aboard cruise ship resides in Bay Area, officials say

A Bay Area resident who was stuck on a cruise ship during a deadly hantavirus outbreak has returned to Santa Clara County and is being monitored by health officials.

The Santa Clara County Public Health Department confirmed Sunday that a county resident has returned to California after being exposed to the Andes hantavirus while on the MV Hondius. Three people on board the luxury cruise ship have died, and at least nine others have suspected cases.

The California resident is being monitored in coordination with the California Department of Public Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the agency said.

CDPH acknowledged in a statement Friday that one California resident had already returned home, but didn’t disclose where they lived. The agency said another Californian remained on the ship as of Friday.

“At this time, there is no known risk to the public in Santa Clara County,” said Sarah Rudman, director of the Santa Clara County Public Health Department.

Advertisement

The CDC has emphasized that the risk to the American public “is extremely low” as American passengers stuck on the ship begin to return home.

Hantavirus is a rare disease typically transmitted to humans through inhalation of particles contaminated with the urine, droppings or saliva from a rodent.

Passengers began disembarking the ship Sunday in the Canary Islands. The CDC says it has sent a team to conduct a risk assessment for each American passenger.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

What Is Body Dysmorphic Disorder?

Published

on

What Is Body Dysmorphic Disorder?

Mandy Rosenberg, 35, from Brookfield, Wisc., has always drawn attention because of her looks. With her long blonde hair, athletic build and large blue eyes, she was called Barbie by some of her high school peers.

But even though people often told her that she was pretty, she didn’t view herself the same way.

She’d spend hours staring at a tiny blemish on her forehead that was barely visible to others. In her mind, it was a large and unsightly scar, and she would climb on top of her bathroom sink to get as close to the mirror as possible while examining it.

“If I couldn’t make that go away, I didn’t want to live anymore,” she said.

Ms. Rosenberg didn’t know it at the time, but she had both obsessive-compulsive disorder and body dysmorphic disorder, or B.D.D., a mental health condition that causes people to spend an inordinate amount of time worrying about their appearance — to the point where they may isolate themselves from others and feel imprisoned in their own bodies.

Advertisement

People with B.D.D. not only think they look unattractive but can become convinced that others will reject them because of their flaws.

“They often feel they’re unlovable,” said Dr. Katharine Phillips, an expert in B.D.D. and a psychiatrist at Weill Cornell Medicine and NewYork-Presbyterian.

Those with B.D.D. fixate on perceived cosmetic problems that to others appear unnoticeable or minor. But it’s not about vanity; instead, people with B.D.D. feel extreme anguish that impairs their functioning.

The disorder typically emerges during adolescence and is estimated to affect 2 to 3 percent of the general population, but these numbers may be conservative because the disorder is underdiagnosed.

Studies have shown differences in the brains of people with B.D.D., said Dr. Jamie Feusner, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine. Some of his research has found that in those who have the condition areas of the brain that help us view things holistically are underactive.

Advertisement

This might be part of the reason that people with B.D.D. have trouble viewing their imperfections as small relative to their entire face or body. It’s akin to looking at a window with a smudge on it, then “thinking that the whole window is ruined,” Dr. Feusner said.

Patients with B.D.D. aren’t always aware that their concerns stem from a mental health problem. Instead, they often believe wholeheartedly that they have physical defects.

Because of this, someone might suffer for a decade or more before seeking help from a mental health provider, said Hilary Weingarden, a psychologist in Massachusetts who studies O.C.D. and related conditions.

Instead, “they’re going to their dermatologist and a plastic surgeon and the dentist and the aesthetician,” she said.

But trying to “fix” their appearance only serves to maintain and exacerbate their anxiety in the long run.

Advertisement

People with B.D.D. may withdraw from relationships, avoid attending work or school, and spend an excessive amount of time on repetitive behaviors like examining themselves in the mirror, attempting to camouflage their appearance or seeking reassurance from others.

Chris Trondsen, a therapist in Costa Mesa, Calif., who diagnosed Ms. Rosenberg with B.D.D., said his patients admit to spending hours chatting with artificially intelligent bots, both seeking affirmation and asking what they ought to fix.

“If you ask a human, people are going to get fed up answering the questions,” Mr. Trondsen said.

Mr. Trondsen was inspired to study psychotherapy because of his own struggle with B.D.D. He used to fixate on his complexion and other parts of his body, too. He worried that his nose was too large for his face and that his body wasn’t muscular enough, a form of B.D.D. called muscle dysmorphia.

“I kept thinking I was getting uglier,” Mr. Trondsen said.

Advertisement

Like many patients with B.D.D., he also spent hours checking his body in mirrors and rarely left his apartment. At 21 years old, Mr. Trondsen became so isolated and consumed by his appearance that he attempted suicide, and might have died had his roommate not discovered him. After that, he sought help and was diagnosed with O.C.D. and B.D.D.

It’s common for those with B.D.D. to also have conditions like O.C.D., major depressive disorder, social phobia and substance use disorder. Studies indicate that people with B.D.D. have high rates of suicidal ideation and behavior, too. One meta-analysis found that, across a patient’s life span, about 66 percent of those with B.D.D. will have thoughts of suicide and around 35 percent will attempt it.

Cognitive behavioral therapy for B.D.D. has been shown to lead to remission in more than half of patients. It includes exposure and response prevention, which is meant to help patients gradually confront the things that they have been avoiding or the rituals they have become dependent upon, like hiding parts of their body with clothing or makeup.

Therapists try to help patients view themselves more holistically, emphasizing that there’s more to them than the specific parts of their bodies they scrutinize.

The disorder can also be treated with serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or S.R.I.s., often at high doses. For those with severe B.D.D., both medication and C.B.T. are recommended, Dr. Phillips said.

Advertisement

For Ms. Rosenberg, cognitive behavioral therapy with her former therapist, Mr. Trondsen, gradually helped her condition.

Later, as part of her treatment, she created a diagram showcasing all of the things that contribute to her identity: She is a daughter and a faithful Christian, she loves dogs and cats, she is a teacher, she is caring — she is more than just her looks.

My body, she said, “doesn’t get to determine how I go about my day.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending