syndication

five-children-see-hiv-viral-loads-vanish-after-taking-antiretroviral-drugs

Five children see HIV viral loads vanish after taking antiretroviral drugs


The first widespread success in curing HIV may come from children, not adults.

An ARV tablet being held in Kisumu, Kenya, on April 24, 2025 Credit: Michel Lunaga/Getty

For years, Philip Goulder has been obsessed with a particularly captivating idea: In the hunt for an HIV cure, could children hold the answers?

Starting in the mid-2010s, the University of Oxford pediatrician and immunologist began working with scientists in the South African province of KwaZulu-Natal, with the aim of tracking several hundred children who had acquired HIV from their mothers, either during pregnancy, childbirth, or breastfeeding.

After putting the children on antiretroviral drugs early in their lives to control the virus, Goulder and his colleagues were keen to monitor their progress and adherence to standard antiretroviral treatment, which stops HIV from replicating. But over the following decade, something unusual happened. Five of the children stopped coming to the clinic to collect their drugs, and when the team eventually tracked them down many months later, they appeared to be in perfect health.

“Instead of their viral loads being through the roof, they were undetectable,” says Goulder. “And normally HIV rebounds within two or three weeks.”

In a study published last year, Goulder described how all five remained in remission, despite having not received regular antiretroviral medication for some time, and in one case, up to 17 months. In the decadeslong search for an HIV cure, this offered a tantalizing insight: that the first widespread success in curing HIV might not come in adults, but in children.

At the recent International AIDS Society conference held in Kigali, Rwanda, in mid-July, Alfredo Tagarro, a pediatrician at the Infanta Sofia University Hospital in Madrid, presented a new study showing that around 5 percent of HIV-infected children who receive antiretrovirals within the first six months of life ultimately suppress the HIV viral reservoir—the number of cells harboring the virus’s genetic material—to negligible levels. “Children have special immunological features which makes it more likely that we will develop an HIV cure for them before other populations,” says Tagarro.

His thoughts were echoed by another doctor, Mark Cotton, who directs the children’s infectious diseases clinical research unit at the University of Stellenbosch, Cape Town.

“Kids have a much more dynamic immune system,” says Cotton. “They also don’t have any additional issues like high blood pressure or kidney problems. It makes them a better target, initially, for a cure.”

According to Tagarro, children with HIV have long been “left behind” in the race to find a treatment that can put HIV-positive individuals permanently into remission. Since 2007, 10 adults are thought to have been cured, having received stem cell transplants to treat life-threatening blood cancer, a procedure which ended up eliminating the virus. Yet with such procedures being both complex and highly risky—other patients have died in the aftermath of similar attempts—it is not considered a viable strategy for specifically targeting HIV.

Instead, like Goulder, pediatricians have increasingly noticed that after starting antiretroviral treatment early in life, a small subpopulation of children then seem able to suppress HIV for months, years, and perhaps even permanently with their immune system alone. This realization initially began with certain isolated case studies: the “Mississippi baby” who controlled the virus for more than two years without medication, and a South African child who was considered potentially cured having kept the virus in remission for more than a decade. Cotton says he suspects that between 10 and 20 percent of all HIV-infected children would be capable of controlling the virus for a significant period of time, beyond the typical two to three weeks, after stopping antiretrovirals.

Goulder is now launching a new study to try and examine this phenomenon in more detail, taking 19 children in South Africa who have suppressed HIV to negligible levels on antiretrovirals, stopping the drugs, and seeing how many can prevent the virus from rebounding, with the aim of understanding why. To date, he says that six of them have been able to control the virus without any drugs for more than 18 months. Based on what he’s seen so far, he has a number of ideas about what could be happening. In particular, it appears that boys are more likely to better control the virus due to a quirk of gender biology to do with the innate immune system, the body’s first-line defense against pathogens.

“The female innate immune system both in utero and in childhood is much more aggressive than the male equivalent when it encounters and senses viruses like HIV,” says Goulder. “Usually that’s a good thing, but because HIV infects activated immune cells, it actually seems to make girls more vulnerable to being infected.”

In addition, Goulder notes that because female fetuses share the same innate immune system as their mothers, the virus transmitted to them is an HIV strain that has become resistant to the female innate immune response.

There could also be other explanations for the long-lasting suppression seen in some children. In some cases, Goulder has observed that the transmitted strain of HIV has been weakened through needing to undergo changes to circumvent the mother’s adaptive immune response, the part of the immune system which learns to target specific viruses and other pathogens. He has also noted that male infants experience particularly large surges of testosterone in the first six months of life—a period known as “mini-puberty”—which can enhance their immune system in various ways that help them fight the virus.

Such revelations are particularly tantalizing as HIV researchers are starting to get access to a far more potent toolbox of therapeutics. Leading the way are so-called bNAbs, or broadly neutralizing antibodies, which have the ability to recognize and fight many different strains of HIV, as well as stimulating the immune system to destroy cells where HIV is hiding. There are also a growing number of therapeutic vaccines in development that can train the immune system’s T cells to target and destroy HIV reservoirs. Children tend to respond to various vaccines better than adults, and Goulder says that if some children are already proving relatively adept at controlling the virus on the back of standard antiretrovirals, these additional therapeutics could give them the additional assistance they need to eradicate HIV altogether.

In the coming years, this is set to be tested in several clinical trials. Cotton is leading the most ambitious attempt, which will see HIV-infected children receive a combination of antiretroviral therapy, three bNAbs, and a vaccine developed by the University of Oxford, while in a separate trial, Goulder is examining the potential of a different bNAb together with antiretrovirals to see whether it can help more children achieve long-term remission.

“We think that adding the effects of these broadly neutralizing antibodies to antiretrovirals will help us chip away at what is needed to achieve a cure,” says Goulder. “It’s a little bit like with leukemia, where treatments have steadily improved, and now the outlook for most children affected is incredibly good. Realistically in most cases, curing HIV probably requires a few hits from different angles, impacting the way that the virus can grow, and tackling it with different immune responses at the same time to essentially force it into a cul-de-sac that it can’t escape from.”

Children are also being viewed as the ideal target population for an even more ambitious experimental treatment, a one-time gene therapy that delivers instructions directing the body’s own muscle cells to produce a continuous stream of bNAbs, without the need for repeated infusions. Maurico Martins, an associate professor at the University of Florida, who is pioneering this new approach, feels that it could represent a particularly practical strategy for low-income countries where HIV transmission to children is particularly rife, and mothers often struggle to keep their children on repeated medication.

“In regions like Uganda or parts of South Africa where this is very prevalent, you could also give this therapy to a baby right after birth as a preventative measure, protecting the newborn child against acquisition of HIV through breastfeeding and maybe even through sexual intercourse later in life,” says Martins.

While Martins also hopes that gene therapy could benefit HIV-infected adults in future, he feels it has more of a chance of initially succeeding in children because their nascent immune systems are less likely to launch what he calls an anti-drug response that can destroy the therapeutic bNAbs.

“It’s very difficult for most antibodies to recognize the HIV envelope protein because it’s buried deep within a sugar coat,” says Martins. “To overcome that, these bNAbs carry a lot of mutations and extensions to their arms which allow them to penetrate that sugar coat. But the problem then is that they’re often viewed by your own immune system as foreign, and it starts making these anti-bNAb antibodies.”

But when Martins tested the therapy in newborn rhesus macaques, it was far more effective. “We found that the first few days or two weeks after birth comprised a sort of sweet spot for this gene therapy,” he says. “And that’s why this could really work very well in treating and preventing pediatric HIV infections.”

Like many HIV scientists, Martins has run into recent funding challenges, with a previous commitment from the National Institutes of Health to support a clinical trial of the novel therapy in HIV-infected children being withdrawn. However, he is hoping that the trial will still go ahead. “We’re now talking with the Gates Foundation to see whether they can sponsor it,” he says.

While children still comprise the minority of overall HIV infections, being able to cure them may yield further insights that help with the wider goal of an overall curative therapy.

“We can learn a lot from them because they are different,” says Goulder. “I think we can learn how to achieve a cure in kids if we continue along this pathway, and from there, that will have applications in adults as well.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

Five children see HIV viral loads vanish after taking antiretroviral drugs Read More »

china-claims-nvidia-built-backdoor-into-h20-chip-designed-for-chinese-market

China claims Nvidia built backdoor into H20 chip designed for Chinese market

The CAC did not specify which experts had found a back door in Nvidia’s products or whether any tests in China had uncovered the same results. Nvidia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Lawmakers in Washington have expressed concern about chip smuggling and introduced a bill that would require chipmakers such as Nvidia to embed location tracking into export-controlled hardware.

Beijing has issued informal guidance to major Chinese tech groups to increase purchases of domestic AI chips in order to reduce reliance on Nvidia and support the evolution of a rival domestic chip ecosystem.

Chinese tech giant Huawei and smaller groups including Biren and Cambricon have benefited from the push to localize chip supply chains.

Nvidia said it would take nine months from restarting manufacturing to shipping the H20 to clients. Industry insiders said there was considerable uncertainty among Chinese customers over whether they would be able to take delivery of any orders if the US reversed its decision to allow its sale.

The Trump administration has faced heavy criticism, including from security experts and former officials, who argue that the H20 sales would accelerate Chinese AI development and threaten US national security.

“There are strong factions on both sides of the Pacific that don’t like the idea of renewing H20 sales,” said Triolo. “In the US, the opposition is clear, but also in China voices are saying that it will slow transition to the alternative ecosystem.”

© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

China claims Nvidia built backdoor into H20 chip designed for Chinese market Read More »

vpn-use-soars-in-uk-after-age-verification-laws-go-into-effect

VPN use soars in UK after age-verification laws go into effect

Also on Friday, the Windscribe VPN service posted a screenshot on X claiming to show a spike in new subscribers. The makers of the AdGuard VPN claimed that they have seen a 2.5X increase in install rates from the UK since Friday.

Nord Security, the company behind the NordVPN app, says it has seen a “1,000 percent increase in purchases” of subscriptions from the UK since the day before the new laws went into effect. “Such spikes in demand for VPNs are not unusual,” Laura Tyrylyte, Nord Security’s head of public relations, tells WIRED. She adds in a statement that “whenever a government announces an increase in surveillance, Internet restrictions, or other types of constraints, people turn to privacy tools.”

People living under repressive governments that impose extensive Internet censorship—like China, Russia, and Iran—have long relied on circumvention tools like VPNs and other technologies to maintain anonymity and access blocked content. But as countries that have long claimed to champion the open Internet and access to information, like the United States, begin considering or adopting age verification laws meant to protect children, the boundaries for protecting digital rights online quickly become extremely murky.

“There will be a large number of people who are using circumvention tech for a range of reasons” to get around age verification laws, the ACLU’s Kahn Gillmor says. “So then as a government you’re in a situation where either you’re obliging the websites to do this on everyone globally, that way legal jurisdiction isn’t what matters, or you’re encouraging people to use workarounds—which then ultimately puts you in the position of being opposed to censorship-circumvention tools.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

VPN use soars in UK after age-verification laws go into effect Read More »

epa-plans-to-ignore-science,-stop-regulating-greenhouse-gases

EPA plans to ignore science, stop regulating greenhouse gases

It derives from a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that named greenhouse gases as “air pollutants,” giving the EPA the mandate to regulate them under the Clean Air Act.

Critics of the rule say that the Clean Air Act was fashioned to manage localized emissions, not those responsible for global climate change.

A rollback would automatically weaken the greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and heavy-duty vehicles. Manufacturers such as Daimler and Volvo Cars have previously opposed the EPA’s efforts to tighten emission standards, while organized labour groups such as the American Trucking Association said they “put the trucking industry on a path to economic ruin.”

However, Katherine García, director of Sierra Club’s Clean Transportation for All Campaign, said that the ruling would be “disastrous for curbing toxic truck pollution, especially in frontline communities disproportionately burdened by diesel exhaust.”

Energy experts said the move could also stall progress on developing clean energy sources such as nuclear power.

“Bipartisan support for nuclear largely rests on the fact that it doesn’t have carbon emissions,” said Ken Irvin, a partner in Sidley Austin’s global energy and infrastructure practice. “If carbon stops being considered to endanger human welfare, that might take away momentum from nuclear.”

The proposed rule from the EPA will go through a public comment period and inter-agency review. It is likely to face legal challenges from environmental activists.

© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

EPA plans to ignore science, stop regulating greenhouse gases Read More »

trump-promised-a-drilling-boom,-but-us-energy-industry-hasn’t-been-interested

Trump promised a drilling boom, but US energy industry hasn’t been interested


Exec: “Liberation Day chaos and tariff antics have harmed the domestic energy industry.”

“We will drill, baby, drill,” President Donald Trump declared at his inauguration on January 20. Echoing the slogan that exemplified his energy policies during the campaign, he made his message clear: more oil and gas, lower prices, greater exports.

Six months into Trump’s second term, his administration has little to show on that score. Output is ticking up, but slower than it did under the Biden administration. Pump prices for gasoline have bobbed around where they were in inauguration week. And exports of crude oil in the four months through April trailed those in the same period last year.

The White House is discovering, perhaps the hard way, that energy markets aren’t easily managed from the Oval Office—even as it moves to roll back regulations on the oil and gas sector, offers up more public lands for drilling at reduced royalty rates, and axes Biden-era incentives for wind and solar.

“The industry is going to do what the industry is going to do,” said Jenny Rowland-Shea, director for public lands at the Center for American Progress, a progressive policy think tank.

That’s because the price of oil, the world’s most-traded commodity, is more responsive to global demand and supply dynamics than to domestic policy and posturing.

The market is flush with supplies at the moment, as the Saudi Arabia-led cartel of oil-producing nations known as OPEC+ allows more barrels to flow while China, the world’s top oil consumer, curbs its consumption. Within the US, a boom in energy demand driven by rapid electrification and AI-serving data centers is boosting power costs for homes and businesses, yet fossil fuel producers are not rushing to ramp up drilling.

There is one key indicator of drilling levels that the industry has watched closely for more than 80 years: a weekly census of active oil and gas rigs published by Baker Hughes. When Trump came into office January 20, the US rig count was 580. Last week, the most recent figure, it was down to 542—hovering just above a four-year low reached earlier in the month.

The most glaring factor behind this stagnant rig count is the current level of crude oil prices. Take the US benchmark grade: West Texas Intermediate crude. Its prices were near $66 a barrel on July 28, after hitting a four-year low of $62 in May. The break-even level for drilling new wells is somewhere close to $60 per barrel, according to oil and gas experts.

That’s before you account for the fallout of elevated tariffs on steel and other imports for the many companies that get their pipes and drilling equipment from overseas, said Robert Rapier, editor-in-chief of Shale Magazine, who has two decades of experience as a chemical engineer.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas’ quarterly survey of over 130 oil and gas producers based in Texas, Louisiana, and New Mexico, conducted in June, suggests the industry’s outlook is pessimistic. Nearly half of the 38 firms that responded to this question saw their firms drilling fewer wells this year than they had earlier expected.

Survey participants could also submit comments. One executive from an exploration and production (E&P) company said, “It’s hard to imagine how much worse policies and DC rhetoric could have been for US E&P companies.” Another executive said, “The Liberation Day chaos and tariff antics have harmed the domestic energy industry. Drill, baby, drill will not happen with this level of volatility.”

Roughly one in three survey respondents chalked up the expectations for fewer wells to higher tariffs on steel imports. And three in four said tariffs raised the cost of drilling and completing new wells.

“They’re getting more places to drill and they’re getting some lower royalties, but they’re also getting these tariffs that they don’t want,” Rapier said. “And the bottom line is their profits are going to suffer.”

Earlier this month, ExxonMobil estimated that its profit in the April-June quarter will be roughly $1.5 billion lower than in the previous three months because of weaker oil and gas prices. And over in Europe, BP, Shell, and TotalEnergies issued similar warnings to investors about hits to their respective profits.

These warnings come even as Trump has installed friendly faces to regulate the oil and gas sector, including at the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of the Interior, the latter of which manages federal lands and is gearing up to auction more oil and gas leases on those lands.

“There’s a lot of enthusiasm for a window of opportunity to make investments. But there’s also a lot of caution about wanting to make sure that if there’s regulatory reforms, they’re going to stick,” said Kevin Book, managing director of research at ClearView Energy Partners, which produces analyses for energy companies and investors.

The recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act contains provisions requiring four onshore and two offshore lease sales every year, lowering the minimum royalty rate to 12.5 percent from 16.67 percent, and bringing back speculative leasing—when lands that don’t invite enough bids are leased for less money—that was stopped in 2022.

“Pro-energy policies play a critical role in strengthening domestic production,” said a spokesperson for the American Petroleum Institute, the top US oil and gas industry group. “The new tax legislation unlocks opportunities for safe, responsible development in critical resource basins to deliver the affordable, reliable fuel Americans rely on.”

Because about half of the federal royalties end up with the states and localities where the drilling occurs, “budgets in these oil and gas communities are going to be hit hard,” Rowland-Shea of American Progress said. Meanwhile, she said, drilling on public lands can pollute the air, raise noise levels, cause spills or leaks, and restrict movement for both people and wildlife.

Earlier this year, Congress killed an EPA rule finalized in November that would have charged oil and gas companies for flaring excess methane from their operations.

“Folks in the Trump camp have long said that the Biden administration was killing drilling by enforcing these regulations on speculative leasing and reining in methane pollution,” said Rowland-Shea. “And yet under Biden, we saw the highest production of oil and gas in history.”

In fact, the top three fossil fuel producers collectively earned less during Trump’s first term than they did in either of President Barack Obama’s terms or under President Joe Biden. “It’s an irony that when Democrats are in there and they’re putting in policies to shift away from oil and gas, which causes the price to go up, that is more profitable for the oil and gas industry,” said Rapier.

That doesn’t mean, of course, that the Trump administration’s actions won’t have long-lasting climate implications. Even though six months may be a significant amount of time in political accounting, investment decisions in the energy sector are made over longer horizons, ClearView’s Book said. As long as the planned lease sales take place, oil companies can snap up and sit on public lands until they see more favorable conditions for drilling.

It’s an irony that when Democrats are in there and they’re putting in policies to shift away from oil and gas, which causes the price to go up, that is more profitable for the oil and gas industry.

What could pad the demand for oil and gas is how the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will withdraw or dilute the Inflation Reduction Act’s tax incentives and subsidies for renewable energy sources. “With the kneecapping of wind and solar, that’s going to put a lot more pressure on fossil fuels to fill that gap,” Rowland-Shea said.

However, the economics of solar and wind are increasingly too attractive to ignore. With electricity demand exceeding expectations, Book said, “any president looking ahead at end-user prices and power supply might revisit or take a flexible position if they find themselves facing shortage.”

A recent United Nations report found that “solar and wind are now almost always the least expensive—and the fastest—option for new electricity generation.” That is why Texas, deemed the oil capital of the world, produces more wind power than any other state and also led the nation in new solar capacity in the last two years.

Renewables like wind and solar, said Rowland-Shea, are “a truly abundant and American source of energy.”

This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News.

Photo of Inside Climate News

Trump promised a drilling boom, but US energy industry hasn’t been interested Read More »

fermented-meat-with-a-side-of-maggots:-a-new-look-at-the-neanderthal-diet

Fermented meat with a side of maggots: A new look at the Neanderthal diet

Traditionally, Indigenous peoples almost universally viewed thoroughly putrefied, maggot-infested animal foods as highly desirable fare, not starvation rations. In fact, many such peoples routinely and often intentionally allowed animal foods to decompose to the point where they were crawling with maggots, in some cases even beginning to liquefy.

This rotting food would inevitably emit a stench so overpowering that early European explorers, fur trappers, and missionaries were sickened by it. Yet Indigenous peoples viewed such foods as good to eat, even a delicacy. When asked how they could tolerate the nauseating stench, they simply responded, “We don’t eat the smell.”

Neanderthals’ cultural practices, similar to those of Indigenous peoples, might be the answer to the mystery of their high δ¹⁵N values. Ancient hominins were butchering, storing, preserving, cooking, and cultivating a variety of items. All these practices enriched their paleo menu with foods in forms that nonhominin carnivores do not consume. Research shows that δ¹⁵N values are higher for cooked foods, putrid muscle tissue from terrestrial and aquatic species, and, with our study, for fly larvae feeding on decaying tissue.

The high δ¹⁵N values of maggots associated with putrid animal foods help explain how Neanderthals could have included plenty of other nutritious foods beyond only meat while still registering δ¹⁵N values we’re used to seeing in hypercarnivores.

We suspect the high δ¹⁵N values seen in Neanderthals reflect routine consumption of fatty animal tissues and fermented stomach contents, much of it in a semi-putrid or putrid state, together with the inevitable bonus of both living and dead ¹⁵N-enriched maggots.

What still isn’t known

Fly larvae are a fat-rich, nutrient-dense, ubiquitous, and easily procured insect resource, and both Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens, much like recent foragers, would have benefited from taking full advantage of them. But we cannot say that maggots alone explain why Neanderthals have such high δ¹⁵N values in their remains.

Several questions about this ancient diet remain unanswered. How many maggots would someone need to consume to account for an increase in δ¹⁵N values above the expected values due to meat eating alone? How do the nutritional benefits of consuming maggots change the longer a food item is stored? More experimental studies on changes in δ¹⁵N values of foods processed, stored, and cooked following Indigenous traditional practices can help us better understand the dietary practices of our ancient relatives.

Melanie Beasley is assistant professor of anthropology at Purdue University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Fermented meat with a side of maggots: A new look at the Neanderthal diet Read More »

microsoft-to-stop-using-china-based-teams-to-support-department-of-defense

Microsoft to stop using China-based teams to support Department of Defense

Last week, Microsoft announced that it would no longer use China-based engineering teams to support the Defense Department’s cloud computing systems, following ProPublica’s investigation of the practice, which cybersecurity experts said could expose the government to hacking and espionage.

But it turns out the Pentagon was not the only part of the government facing such a threat. For years, Microsoft has also used its global workforce, including China-based personnel, to maintain the cloud systems of other federal departments, including parts of Justice, Treasury and Commerce, ProPublica has found.

This work has taken place in what’s known as the Government Community Cloud, which is intended for information that is not classified but is nonetheless sensitive. The Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, the US government’s cloud accreditation organization, has approved GCC to handle “moderate” impact information “where the loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability would result in serious adverse effect on an agency’s operations, assets, or individuals.”

The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division has used GCC to support its criminal and civil investigation and litigation functions, according to a 2022 report. Parts of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Education have also used GCC.

Microsoft says its foreign engineers working in GCC have been overseen by US-based personnel known as “digital escorts,” similar to the system it had in place at the Defense Department.

Nevertheless, cybersecurity experts told ProPublica that foreign support for GCC presents an opportunity for spying and sabotage. “There’s a misconception that, if government data isn’t classified, no harm can come of its distribution,” said Rex Booth, a former federal cybersecurity official who now is chief information security officer of the tech company SailPoint.

“With so much data stored in cloud services—and the power of AI to analyze it quickly—even unclassified data can reveal insights that could harm US interests,” he said.

Microsoft to stop using China-based teams to support Department of Defense Read More »

inventor-claims-bleach-injections-will-destroy-cancer-tumors

Inventor claims bleach injections will destroy cancer tumors


A lack of medical training isn’t stopping a man from charging $20,000 for the treatment.

Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images

Xuewu Liu, a Chinese inventor who has no medical training or credentials of any kind, is charging cancer patients $20,000 for access to an AI-driven but entirely unproven treatment that includes injecting a highly concentrated dose of chlorine dioxide, a toxic bleach solution, directly into cancerous tumors.

One patient tells WIRED her tumor has grown faster since the procedure and that she suspects it may have caused her cancer to spread—a claim Liu disputes—while experts allege his marketing of the treatment has likely put him on the wrong side of US regulations. Nonetheless, while Liu currently only offers the treatment informally in China and at a German clinic, he is now working with a Texas-based former pharmaceutical executive to bring his treatment to America. They believe that the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as US health secretary will help “open doors” to get the untested treatment—in which at least one clinic in California appears to have interest—approved in the US.

Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again movement is embracing alternative medicines and the idea of giving patients the freedom to try unproven treatments. While the health secretary did not respond to a request for comment about Liu’s treatment, he did mention chlorine dioxide when questioned about President Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed during his Senate confirmation hearing in February, and the Food and Drug Administration recently removed a warning about the substance from its website. The agency says the removal was part of a routine process of archiving old pages on its site, but it has had the effect of emboldening the bleacher community.

“Without the FDA’s heavy-handed warnings, it’s likely my therapy would have been accepted for trials years earlier, with institutional partnerships and investor support,” Liu tells WIRED. He says he wrote to Kennedy earlier this year urging him to conduct more research on chlorine dioxide. “This quiet removal won’t immediately change everything, but it opens a door. If mainstream media reports on this shift, I believe it will unlock a new wave of serious [chlorine dioxide] research.”

For decades, pseudoscience grifters have peddled chlorine dioxide solutions—sold under a variety of names, such as Miracle Mineral Solution—and despite warnings and prosecutions have continued to claim the toxic substance is a “cure” for everything from HIV to COVID-19 to autism. There is no credible evidence to back up any of these claims, which critics have long labeled as nothing more than a grift.

The treatments typically involve drinking liquid chlorine dioxide on a regular basis, using solutions with concentrations of chlorine dioxide of around 3,000 parts per million (ppm), which is diluted further in water.

Liu’s treatment, however, involves a much higher concentration of chlorine dioxide—injections of several millilitres of 20,000 ppm—and, rather than drinking it, patients have it injected directly into their tumors.

I injected myself to test it

Liu claims he has injected himself with the solution more than 50 times and suffered no side effects. “This personal data point encouraged me to continue research,” he says.

Liu has been making the solution in his rented apartment in Beijing by mixing citric acid with sodium chlorite, according to an account he shared earlier this month on his Substack that revealed that a “violent explosion” occurred when he made a mistake.

“The blast blacked out my vision,” Liu wrote. “Dense clouds of chlorine dioxide burst into my face, filling my eyes, nose, and mouth. I stumbled back into the apartment, rushing to the bathroom to wash out the gas from my eyes and respiratory tract. My lungs were burning. Later, I would find 4–5 cuts on my upper thigh—shards of glass had pierced through my pants.” Liu also revealed that his 3-year-old daughter was nearby when the explosion happened.

Liu began a preclinical study on animals in 2016, before beginning to use the highly concentrated solution to treat human patients in more recent years. He claims that between China and Germany, he has treated 20 patients to date.

When asked for evidence to back up his claims of efficacy, Liu shared links to a number of preprints, which have not been peer-reviewed, with WIRED. He also shared a pitch deck for a $5 million seed round in a US-focused startup that would provide the chlorine dioxide injections.

The presentation contains a number of “case studies” of patients he has treated—including a dog—but rather than featuring detailed scientific data, the deck contains disturbing images of the patients’ tumors. The deck also contains, as evidence of the treatment’s efficacy, a screenshot of a WhatsApp conversation with a patient who was apparently treating a liver tumor with chlorine dioxide.

“Screenshots of WhatsApp chats with patients or their doctors is not evidence of efficacy, yet that is the only evidence he provides,” says Alex Morozov, an oncologist who has overseen hundreds of drug trials at multiple companies including Pfizer. “Needless to say, until appropriate studies are done and published in peer-reviewed journals, or presented at a reputable conference, no patients should be treated except in the context of clinical trials.”

WIRED spoke to a patient of Liu’s, whose descriptions of the treatment appear to undermine his claims of efficacy and raise serious questions about its safety.

“I bought the needles online and made the chlorine dioxide by myself [then] I injected it into the tumor and lymph nodes by myself,” says the patient, a Chinese national living in the UK. WIRED granted her anonymity to protect her privacy.

The patient had previously been taking oral solutions of chlorine dioxide as an alternative treatment for cancer, but, unsatisfied with the results, she contacted Liu via WhatsApp. On a spring evening last year, she took her first injection of chlorine dioxide and, she says, almost immediately suffered negative side effects.

“It was fine after the injection, but I was woken up by severe pain [like] I had never experienced in my life,” she says. “The pain lasted for three to four days.”

Despite the pain, she says, she injected herself again two months later, and a month after that she traveled to China, where Liu, despite having no medical training, injected her, using an anesthetic cream to numb the skin.

“While this act technically fell outside legal boundaries, in China, if the patient is competent and gives informed consent, such compassionate-use interventions rarely attract regulatory attention unless harm is done,” Liu tells WIRED.

Legal in China?

Experts on Chinese medical regulations tell WIRED that new treatments like Liu’s would have to meet strict conditions before they can be administered to patients. “It would have to go through the same steps in China as it does in the US, so that will involve clinical studies, getting ethics approval at the hospitals, and then the situation would have to be reviewed by the Chinese government,” Ames Gross, founder and president of Pacific Bridge Capital, tells WIRED. “I don’t think any of it sounds very legal.” The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which handles all international press inquiries, did not respond to a request for comment.

As well as the initial pain, the chlorine dioxide injections also appear, the patient says, to have made the cancer worse.

“The tumor shrinks first, then it grows faster than before,” she says, adding: “My tumor has spread to the skin after injection. I suspect it is because the chlorine dioxide has broken the vein and the cancer cells go to the skin area.”

Liu did not agree with this assessment, instead blaming the fact that the patient had not completed the full course of four injections within a month, as he typically prescribes.

The patient says that thanks to a WeChat group that Liu set up, she is also in contact with other people who have had chlorine dioxide injections. One of the women, who is based in Shenzhen, China, had at least one injection of chlorine dioxide to treat what was described as vaginal cancer, but she says she is also suffering complications, according to screenshots of conversations reviewed by WIRED.

“After the injection, there was swelling and difficulty urinating,” the Chinese woman wrote. “It was very uncomfortable.”

Despite having injected a patient in China last August, Liu tells WIRED, he is not a licensed physician—he calls himself “an independent inventor and medical researcher.” The treatment, which he says is “designed to be administered by licensed physicians in clinical settings,” is so painful that it needs to be given under general anesthetic.

While Liu’s website says the treatment is being offered at clinics in Mexico, Brazil, and the Philippines, he tells WIRED that the treatment is currently only being offered at the CMC Rheinfelden clinic on the German-Swiss border. Liu features Dr. Wolfgang Renz from the clinic on his own website as one of his partners; the clinic itself does not advertise the treatment on its own website.

In conversations on WhatsApp shared with WIRED, a representative of the clinic named Lena told a prospective patient that it didn’t advertise the chlorine dioxide procedure because it was “not a legal treatment.” Lena later wrote that chlorine dioxide was not referenced on an invoice the clinic sent the same prospective patient because it is “not a legal treatment.” Lena also told the prospective patient that they had treated patients from France, Italy, and the US, according to a recording of a phone call shared with WIRED. One Italian woman is currently trying to raise money to fund her treatment in the German clinic on GoFundMe.

When asked about her comments, Lena told WIRED, “Either [the patient] misquoted me or my English was not very accurate. I repeatedly told [the patient] that it is not an approved therapy and therefore requires very detailed consent and special circumstances to be eligible for this treatment.” The prospective patient was told that she would need to bring documents detailing her prior treatment.

Renz did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Lena also says that patients who have exhausted every other possible treatment have “the right to be treated with non-approved interventions under strict ethical conditions, full medical supervision, and informed patient consent.” The Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, which regulates medical products in Germany, did not respond to a request for comment, but Liu tells WIRED that German authorities are investigating a complaint about the clinic.

Expanding across the Pacific

Liu now appears laser-focused on making his treatment available in the US. Despite the lack of clinical data to back up his claims, Liu claims to have signed up over 100 US patients to take part in a proposed clinical research program. Liu shared a screenshot with WIRED including what appeared to be patients’ full names, zip codes, and the type of cancer they are suffering from. It’s unclear if any of the patients had agreed to have their information shared with a journalist.

Liu says he has recruited most of his potential patients via his own website. “Are You a U.S. Cancer Patient? Join the National Campaign to legalize a breakthrough therapy,” a popup that sometimes appears on Liu’s website reads, urging visitors to fill out a patient advocacy application to potentially become part of a clinical trial.

One of those who signed up is Sarah Jones, who has been diagnosed with stage 4 anal cancer that has metastasized to the lymph nodes. Jones, whose identity WIRED is protecting with a pseudonym, has already been treated with chemotherapy and drugs like cisplatin and paclitaxel. The chemotherapy originally caused the tumor to shrink, but it has since returned, and Jones is now seeking alternative treatments.

“I spend my days treating this disease like a job. Red light therapy, guided meditations, exercising, eating a keto-strong diet, and researching,” Jones tells WIRED. “This is how I stumbled upon Liu and his intratumoral injections.”

Despite signing up for a potential trial, Jones understands the risks but feels as if she is running out of choices. “I am extremely concerned that there are but a handful of patients and no data to speak of for this procedure,” Jones says. “I am debating all of my options and am constantly looking for anything that can help.”

This sentiment was echoed by Kevin, whose father has neck cancer and who also signed up as a potential patient for the trial. “If you’re in any cancer patient’s shoes, if you’re out of options, what else do you have to do? You either keep trying new therapies, or you die.”

Another US-based patient with untreated colon cancer who signed up on Liu’s website was informed that they should consider traveling to Germany for treatment, according to a screenshot of an email response from Liu, shared with WIRED. The email outlined that the cost would be €5,000 per injection, adding that “typically 4 injections [are] recommended.”

When the conversation moved to WhatsApp, Liu asked the patient what size the tumor was. The patient, who was granted anonymity to protect their privacy, told Liu the tumor was 3.8 centimeters, according to a screenshot of the WhatsApp conversation reviewed by WIRED.

Liu responded with inaccurate details and information that the patient did not share. Liu also referred to a rectal tumor rather than a colon tumor.

When the patient said they didn’t have the money to travel to Europe for the treatment and asked about getting it in the US, referencing the Williams Cancer Institute in Beverly Hills, California, Liu suggested contacting the clinic directly.

The clinic has indicated its interest in Liu’s unproven procedure by writing about Liu’s chlorine dioxide injection protocol on its own website and mentioned it on a post on its Facebook page. Liu tells WIRED that he has spoken to Jason Williams, director of the clinic. “He is very interested and is a pioneer in the field of intratumoral injections,” Liu says. “His clinic is fully capable of implementing my therapy.”

Neither Williams nor his colleague Nathan Goodyear, who Liu also says he spoke to, responded to repeated emails and phone calls seeking comment.

Liu also gave WIRED the names of a radiologist in California, an anesthesiologist in Seattle, and a physician in Missouri who he claims to have spoken to about providing his treatment in the US, but none of them responded to requests for comment.

The Chinese inventor did, however, appear on a livestream with two US-based doctors, Curtis Anderson, a Florida-based physician, and Mark Rosenberg, who works at the Institute for Healthy Aging. The discussion, hosted on Liu’s YouTube channel, saw the two doctors ask about which cancers to treat with the injections, how to buy chlorine dioxide, or even whether it’s possible to make it themselves.

Rosenberg and Anderson did not respond to requests for comment.

Maybe RFK Jr. will dig it?

Conducting a clinical trial of a new drug in the US requires approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Liu initially claimed to WIRED that “according to Article 37 of the Declaration of Helsinki and the US Right to Try laws, my therapy is already legally permissible in the United States.” Legal experts WIRED spoke to disagree strongly with Liu’s assertions.

“It sounds like Mr. Liu may not understand how the Right to Try Act or the Declaration of Helsinki work or how they fit within the broader context in which the FDA regulates investigational drugs,” Clint Hermes, an attorney with Bass, Berry & Sims, with extensive expertise in biomedical research, tells WIRED. “If he is under the impression that the ‘breast cancer trial’ referenced on his website is sufficient on its own to allow him to market or study his therapy in the US under right to try and/or the Declaration of Helsinki, he is mistaken.”

Even advertising the efficacy of an unproven treatment could land Liu in trouble, according to the American Health Law Association (AHLA).

“Companies cannot make claims regarding safety or efficacy until their products have been approved for marketing by the FDA,” Mary Kohler, a member of the AHLA’s Life Science leadership team, tells WIRED. “From a quick glance at the website, I see several claims that FDA’s Office of Prescription Drug Promotion (OPDP) would likely consider violative as pre-approval promotion even if this company were in trials that FDA was overseeing.”

The FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to requests for comment.

When asked about these issues, Liu clarified that he was planning to initially conduct a 100-person “clinical research program” that would not require FDA approval, but Liu’s treatment doesn’t appear to meet any of the most common exemptions that would allow such a trial to take place, according to the FDA’s own website.

Liu also says he is working with “patient advocates” and leveraging their local connections to lobby state lawmakers in “liberty-leaning states” to allow the experimental treatment to be administered. This would appear to circumvent federal rules. Liu says that he has yet to make contact with such a lawmaker directly.

While he has no approval from US government agencies or support of a state or national lawmaker, Liu does have the full backing of Scott Hagerman, an entrepreneur and former executive with 30 years experience in the pharmaceutical industry, including a decade working at Pfizer.

“It’s an unbelievable breakthrough,” Hagerman tells WIRED, adding that he and his wife have been using oral chlorine dioxide solution “for some time” as a preventative measure rather than to treat a specific ailment.

Hagerman’s time in the pharmaceutical industry included over a decade running a company called Chemi Nutra, which has in the past received a US patent for a soy-based supplement that addresses testosterone decline in men. He also says he oversaw teams of scientists who worked on drug applications to the FDA for oncology drugs.

Hagerman retired from Chemi Nutra in 2021, and in the intervening years his comments indicate that he appears to have become entirely disillusioned with the modern pharmaceutical industry, referring to it as a “drugs cartel” and “a corrupt entity that is only profit-driven.” One of the issues Hagerman references is the COVID-19 vaccine based on mRNA technology, which he describes as a “con job” while also boosting the debunked theory that childhood vaccines are linked to increasing levels of autism reported in the population.

As a result, he sees Liu’s lack of experience as a positive.

“I would welcome the fact that he’s not a doctor, that he’s not an MD, because he’s not clouded, jaded, and biased with all kinds of misguidance that would push them the wrong way,” Hagerman says, adding, “I’d like to help him establish some network here in the US, because obviously the US is where the action is.” Hagerman says he is “100 percent sure” that there would be investors willing to fund the development of this treatment.

When asked about a timeline to have this procedure legally available in the US, Hagerman said he hopes it could be achieved before the end of 2025. Liu, however, thinks it could take slightly longer, saying that he believes clinical trials will begin in 2026.

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

Inventor claims bleach injections will destroy cancer tumors Read More »

trump-wants-to-“eliminate-or-expedite”-environmental-rules-for-rocket-launches

Trump wants to “eliminate or expedite” environmental rules for rocket launches


Who cares about environmental impacts?

SpaceX, other commercial launch firms, have been seeking this change in policy.

In the background, a Falcon 9 rocket climbs away from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida. Another Falcon 9 stands on its launch pad at neighboring Kennedy Space Center awaiting its opportunity to fly.

The Trump administration is considering slashing rules meant to protect the environment and the public during commercial rocket launches, changes that companies like Elon Musk’s SpaceX have long sought.

A draft executive order being circulated among federal agencies, and viewed by ProPublica, directs Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy to “use all available authorities to eliminate or expedite” environmental reviews for launch licenses. It could also, in time, require states to allow more launches or even more launch sites—known as spaceports—along their coastlines.

The order is a step toward the rollback of federal oversight that Musk, who has fought bitterly with the Federal Aviation Administration over his space operations, and others have pushed for. Commercial rocket launches have grown exponentially more frequent in recent years.

Critics warn such a move could have dangerous consequences.

“It would not be reasonable for them to be rescinding regulations that are there to protect the public interest, and the public, from harm,” said Jared Margolis, a senior attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit that works to protect animals and the environment. “And that’s my fear here: Are they going to change things in a way that puts people at risk, that puts habitats and wildlife at risk?”

The White House did not answer questions about the draft order.

“The Trump administration is committed to cementing America’s dominance in space without compromising public safety or national security,” said White House spokesperson Kush Desai. “Unless announced by President Trump, however, discussion about any potential policy changes should be deemed speculation.”

The order would give Trump even more direct control over the space industry’s chief regulator by turning the civil servant position leading the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation into a political appointment. The last head of the office and two other top officials recently took voluntary separation offers.

The order would also create a new adviser to the transportation secretary to shepherd in deregulation of the space industry.

The draft order comes as SpaceX is ramping up its ambitious project to build a reusable deep-space rocket to carry people to Earth’s orbit, the moon and eventually Mars. The rocket, called Starship, is the largest, most powerful ever built, standing 403 feet tall with its booster. The company has hit some milestones but has also been beset by problems, as three of the rockets launched from Texas this year have exploded—disrupting air traffic and raining debris on beaches and roads in the Caribbean and Gulf waters.

The draft order also seeks to restrict the authority of state coastal officials who have challenged commercial launch companies like SpaceX, documents show. It could lead to federal officials interfering with state efforts to enforce their environmental rules when they conflict with the construction or operation of spaceports.

Derek Brockbank, executive director for the Coastal States Organization, said the proposed executive order could ultimately force state commissions to prioritize spaceport infrastructure over other land uses, such as renewable energy, waterfront development, or coastal restoration, along the coastline. His nonprofit represents 34 coastal states and territories.

“It’s concerning that it could potentially undermine the rights of a state to determine how it wants its coast used, which was the very fundamental premise of the congressionally authorized Coastal Zone Management Act,” he said. “We shouldn’t see any president, no matter what their party is, coming in and saying, ‘This is what a state should prioritize or should do.’”

SpaceX is already suing the California Coastal Commission, accusing the agency of political bias and interference with the company’s efforts to increase the number of Falcon 9 rocket launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base. The reusable Falcon 9 is SpaceX’s workhorse rocket, ferrying satellites to orbit and astronauts to the International Space Station.

The changes outlined in the order would greatly benefit SpaceX, which launches far more rockets into space than any other company in the US. But it would also help rivals such as Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin and California-based Rocket Lab. The companies have been pushing to pare down oversight for years, warning that the US is racing with China to return to the moon—in hopes of mining resources like water and rare earth metals and using it as a stepping stone to Mars—and could lose if regulations don’t allow US companies to move faster, said Dave Cavossa, president of the Commercial Space Federation, a trade group that represents eight launch companies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Rocket Lab.

“It sounds like they’ve been listening to industry, because all of those things are things that we’ve been advocating for strongly,” Cavossa said when asked about the contents of the draft order.

Cavossa said he sees “some sort of environmental review process” continuing to take place. “What we’re talking about doing is right-sizing it,” he said.

He added, “We can’t handle a yearlong delay for launch licenses.”

The former head of the FAA’s commercial space office said at a Congressional hearing last September that the office took an average of 151 days to issue a new license during the previous 11 years.

Commercial space launches have boomed in recent years—from 26 in 2019 to 157 last year. With more than 500 total launches, mostly from Texas, Florida, and California, SpaceX has been responsible for the lion’s share, according to FAA data.

But the company has tangled with the FAA, which last year proposed fining it $633,000 for violations related to two of its launches. The FAA did not answer a question last week about the status of the proposed fine.

SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, and the FAA did not respond to requests for comment.

Currently, the FAA’s environmental reviews look at 14 types of potential impacts that include air and water quality, noise pollution, and land use, and provide details about the launches that are not otherwise available. They have at times drawn big responses from the public.

When SpaceX sought to increase its Starship launches in Texas from five to 25 a year, residents and government agencies submitted thousands of comments. Most of the nearly 11,400 publicly posted comments opposed the increase, a ProPublica analysis found. The FAA approved the increase anyway earlier this year. After conducting an environmental assessment for the May launch of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 9 from Texas, the FAA released documents that revealed as many as 175 airline flights could be disrupted and Turks and Caicos’ Providenciales International Airport would need to close during the launch.

In addition to seeking to cut short environmental reviews, the executive order would open the door for the federal government to rescind sections of the federal rule that seeks to keep the public safe during launches and reentries.

The rule, referred to as Part 450, was approved during Trump’s first term and aimed to streamline commercial space regulations and speed approvals of launches. But the rule soon fell out of favor with launch companies, which said the FAA didn’t provide enough guidance on how to comply and was taking too long to review applications.

Musk helped lead the charge. Last September, he told attendees at a conference in Los Angeles, “It really should not be possible to build a giant rocket faster than paper can move from one desk to another.” He called for the resignation of the head of the FAA, who stepped down as Trump took office.

Other operators have expressed similar frustration, and some members of Congress have signaled support for an overhaul. In February, Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., signed a letter asking the Government Accountability Office to review the process for approving commercial launches and reentries.

In their letter, Babin and Lofgren wrote they wanted to understand whether the rules are “effectively and efficiently accommodating United States commercial launch and reentry operations, especially as the cadence and technological diversity of such operations continues to increase.

The draft executive order directs the secretary of transportation to “reevaluate, amend, or rescind” sections of Part 450 to “enable a diversified set of operators to achieve an increase in commercial space launch cadence and novel space activities by an order of magnitude by 2030.”

The order also directs the Department of Commerce to streamline regulation of novel space activity, which experts say could include things like mining or making repairs in space, that doesn’t fall under other regulations.

Brandon Roberts and Pratheek Rebala contributed data analysis.

This story originally appeared on ProPublica.

Photo of ProPublica

Trump wants to “eliminate or expedite” environmental rules for rocket launches Read More »

win-for-chemical-industry-as-epa-shutters-scientific-research-office

Win for chemical industry as EPA shutters scientific research office


Deregulation runs rampant

Companies feared rules and lawsuits based on Office of Research and Development assessments.

Soon after President Donald Trump took office in January, a wide array of petrochemical, mining, and farm industry coalitions ramped up what has been a long campaign to limit use of the Environmental Protection Agency’s assessments of the health risks of chemicals.

That effort scored a significant victory Friday when EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced his decision to dismantle the agency’s Office of Research and Development (ORD).

The industry lobbyists didn’t ask for hundreds of ORD staff members to be laid off or reassigned. But the elimination of the agency’s scientific research arm goes a long way toward achieving the goal they sought.

In a January 27 letter to Zeldin organized by the American Chemistry Council, more than 80 industry groups—including leading oil, refining, and mining associations—asked him to end regulators’ reliance on ORD assessments of the risks that chemicals pose for human health. The future of that research, conducted under EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System program, or IRIS, is now uncertain.

“EPA’s IRIS program within ORD has a troubling history of being out of step with the best available science and methods, lacking transparency, and being unresponsive to peer review and stakeholder recommendations,” said an American Chemistry Council spokesperson in an email when asked about the decision to eliminate ORD. “This results in IRIS assessments that jeopardize access to critical chemistries, undercut national priorities, and harm American competitiveness.”

The spokesperson said the organization supports EPA evaluating its resources to ensure tax dollars are being used efficiently and effectively.

Christopher Frey, an associate dean at North Carolina State University who served as EPA assistant administrator in charge of ORD during the Biden administration, defended the quality of the science done by the office, which he said is “the poster case study of what it means to do science that’s subject to intense scrutiny.”

“There’s industry with a tremendous vested interest in the policy decisions that might occur later on,” based on the assessments made by ORD. “What the industry does is try to engage in a proxy war over the policy by attacking the science.”

Among the IRIS assessments that stirred the most industry concern were those outlining the dangers of formaldehyde, ethylene oxide, arsenic, and hexavalent chromium. Regulatory actions had begun or were looming on all during the Biden administration.

The Biden administration also launched a lawsuit against a LaPlace, Louisiana, plant that had been the only US manufacturer of neoprene, Denka Performance Elastomer, based in part on the IRIS assessment of one of its air pollutants, chloroprene, as a likely human carcinogen. Denka, a spinoff of DuPont, announced it was ceasing production in May because of the cost of pollution controls.

Public health advocates charge that eliminating the IRIS program, or shifting its functions to other offices in the agency, will rob the EPA of the independent expertise to inform its mission of protection.

“They’ve been trying for years to shut down IRIS,” said Darya Minovi, a senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists and lead author of a new study on Trump administration actions that the group says undermine science. “The reason why is because when IRIS conducts its independent scientific assessments using a great amount of rigor… you get stronger regulations, and that is not in the best interest of the big business polluters and those who have a financial stake in the EPA’s demise.”

The UCS report tallied more than 400 firings, funding cuts, and other attacks on science in the first six months of the Trump administration, resulting in 54 percent fewer grants for research on topics including cancer, infectious disease, and environmental health.

EPA’s press office did not respond to a query on whether the IRIS controversy helped inform Zeldin’s decision to eliminate ORD, which had been anticipated since staff were informed of the potential plan at a meeting in March. In the agency’s official announcement Friday afternoon, Zeldin said the elimination of the office was part of “organizational improvements” that would deliver $748.8 million in savings to taxpayers. The reduction in force, combined with previous departures and layoffs, have reduced the agency’s workforce by 23 percent, to 12,448, the EPA said.

With the cuts, the EPA’s workforce will be at its lowest level since fiscal year 1986.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, EPA has taken a close look at our operations to ensure the agency is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment while Powering the Great American Comeback,” Zeldin said in the prepared statement. “This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars.”

The agency will be creating a new Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions; a report by E&E News said an internal memo indicated the new office would be much smaller than ORD, and would focus on coastal areas, drinking water safety, and methodologies for assessing environmental contamination.

Zeldin’s announcement also said that scientific expertise and research efforts will be moved to “program offices”—for example, those concerned with air pollution, water pollution, or waste—to tackle “statutory obligations and mission essential functions.” That phrase has a particular meaning: The chemical industry has long complained that Congress never passed a law creating IRIS. Congress did, however, pass many laws requiring that the agency carry out its actions based on the best available science, and the IRIS program, established during President Ronald Reagan’s administration, was how the agency has carried out the task of assessing the science on chemicals since 1985.

Justin Chen, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, the union representing 8,000 EPA workers nationwide, said the organizational structure of ORD put barriers between the agency’s researchers and the agency’s political decision-making, enforcement, and regulatory teams—even though they all used ORD’s work.

“For them to function properly, they have to have a fair amount of distance away from political interference, in order to let the science guide and develop the kind of things that they do,” Chen said.

“They’re a particular bugbear for a lot of the industries which are heavy donors to the Trump administration and to the right wing,” Chen said. “They’re the ones, I believe, who do all the testing that actually factors into the calculation of risk.”

ORD also was responsible for regularly doing assessments that the Clean Air Act requires on pollutants like ozone and particulate matter, which result from the combustion of fossil fuels.

Frey said a tremendous amount of ORD work has gone into ozone, which is the result of complex interactions of precursor pollutants in the atmosphere. The open source computer modeling on ozone transport, developed by ORD researchers, helps inform decision-makers grappling with how to address smog around the country. The Biden administration finalized stricter standards for particulate matter in its final year based on ORD’s risk assessment, and the Trump administration is now undoing those rules.

Aidan Hughes contributed to this report.

This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News.

Photo of Inside Climate News

Win for chemical industry as EPA shutters scientific research office Read More »

uk-backing-down-on-apple-encryption-backdoor-after-pressure-from-us

UK backing down on Apple encryption backdoor after pressure from US

Under the terms of the legislation, recipients of such a notice are unable to discuss the matter publicly, even with customers affected by the order, unless granted permission by the Home Secretary.

The legislation’s use against Apple has triggered the tech industry’s highest-profile battle over encryption technology in almost a decade.

In response to the demand, Apple withdrew its most secure cloud storage service from the UK in February and is now challenging the Home Office’s order at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, which probes complaints against the UK’s security services.

Last month, Meta-owned WhatsApp said it would join Apple’s legal challenge, in a rare collaboration between the Silicon Valley rivals.

In the meantime, the Home Office continues to pursue its case with Apple at the tribunal.

Its lawyers discussed the next legal steps this month, reflecting the divisions within government over how best to proceed. “At this point, the government has not backed down,” said one person familiar with the legal process.

A third senior British official added that the UK government was reluctant to push “anything that looks to the US vice-president like a free-speech issue.”

In a combative speech at the Munich Security Conference in February, Vance argued that free speech and democracy were threatened by European elites.

The UK official added, this “limits what we’re able to do in the future, particularly in relation to AI regulation.” The Labour government has delayed plans for AI legislation until after May next year.

Trump has also been critical of the UK stance on encryption.

The US president has likened the UK’s order to Apple to “something… that you hear about with China,” saying in February that he had told Starmer: “You can’t do this.”

US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has also suggested the order would be an “egregious violation” of Americans’ privacy that risked breaching the two countries’ data agreement.

Apple did not respond to a request for comment. “We have never built a back door or master key to any of our products, and we never will,” Apple said in February.

The UK government did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesperson for Vance declined to comment.

The Home Office has previously said the UK has “robust safeguards and independent oversight to protect privacy” and that these powers “are only used on an exceptional basis, in relation to the most serious crimes.”

© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be redistributed, copied, or modified in any way.

UK backing down on Apple encryption backdoor after pressure from US Read More »

southwestern-drought-likely-to-continue-through-2100,-research-finds

Southwestern drought likely to continue through 2100, research finds

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, non-partisan news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. Sign up for their newsletter here.

The drought in the Southwestern US is likely to last for the rest of the 21st century and potentially beyond as global warming shifts the distribution of heat in the Pacific Ocean, according to a study published last week led by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin.

Using sediment cores collected in the Rocky Mountains, paleoclimatology records and climate models, the researchers found warming driven by greenhouse gas emissions can alter patterns of atmospheric and marine heat in the North Pacific Ocean in a way resembling what’s known as the negative phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), fluctuations in sea surface temperatures that result in decreased winter precipitation in the American Southwest. But in this case, the phenomenon can last far longer than the usual 30-year cycle of the PDO.

“If the sea surface temperature patterns in the North Pacific were just the result of processes related to stochastic [random] variability in the past decade or two, we would have just been extremely unlucky, like a really bad roll of the dice,” said Victoria Todd, the lead author of the study and a PhD student in geosciences at University of Texas at Austin. “But if, as we hypothesize, this is a forced change in the sea surface temperatures in the North Pacific, this will be sustained into the future, and we need to start looking at this as a shift, instead of just the result of bad luck.”

Currently, the Southwestern US is experiencing a megadrought resulting in the aridification of the landscape, a decades-long drying of the region brought on by climate change and the overconsumption of the region’s water. That’s led to major rivers and their basins, such as the Colorado and Rio Grande rivers, seeing reduced flows and a decline of the water stored in underground aquifers, which is forcing states and communities to reckon with a sharply reduced water supply. Farmers have cut back on the amount of water they use. Cities are searching for new water supplies. And states, tribes, and federal agencies are engaging in tense negotiations over how to manage declining resources like the Colorado River going forward.

Southwestern drought likely to continue through 2100, research finds Read More »