Video from a national park in Uganda depicted a parade of predatory species feeding on and dispersing fruit bats that are known natural reservoirs of infectious diseases.Bats carry an assortment of viruses, including infectious diseases that have jumped into humans in a process known as zoonotic spillover. In some cases, the aerial mammals have infected people directly. But in other cases, scientists believe, bats have passed deadly viruses onto other animal species, which subsequently infected humans.A remarkable new video from Uganda provides direct visual evidence of many different wild animals interacting with wild bats, revealing just how many opportunities there are for potentially deadly bat viruses to jump into new species. It was published along with a paper posted online on Monday but not yet peer reviewed.On Feb. 17, Bosco Atukwatse, a young Ugandan wildlife biologist working with the Kyambura Lion Project, set up solar-powered camera traps near the mouth of Python Cave in the Maramagambo Forest, in Queen Elizabeth National Park in Uganda. He was collecting data about leopards and spotted hyenas in the forest.Through a mixture of what he called “curiosity and luck,” he filmed far more than leopards. Hundreds of nights of footage revealed a steady procession of 13 additional predator species, among them large-spotted genets, African civets, African fish eagles, African rock pythons, L’Hoest’s monkeys and baboons. Python Cave is home to as many as 50,000 Egyptian fruit bats, and the predators emerged from the cave with a winged snack, which they either hunted or scavenged, in their mouths.“It was amazing how many animals come to eat bats at that specific spot,” Mr. Atukwatse said. He added, “It’s basically a free meal for everybody in the area.”That is significant in part because the fruit bats, including in the area’s caves, are known to be a natural reservoir for infectious diseases, including the deadly Marburg virus.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

The judge accused the Trump administration of discriminating against minorities and L.G.B.T.Q. people and ordered the government to restore much of the funding.A federal judge on Monday declared the Trump administration’s move to cut hundreds of grants issued by the National Institutes of Health illegal, accusing the government of discrimination against minorities and L.G.B.T.Q. individuals.Ruling from the bench, Judge William G. Young of the Federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts ordered the government to restore much of the funding.Judge Young, a Reagan appointee with 40 years of experience as a federal judge, said the Trump administration’s rationale for canceling the grants, which support research into topics such as gender identity and equity in health care, appeared to be rooted in prejudice. He noted the administration’s efforts to eliminate any trace of diversity and equity initiatives from the federal government, as well as its attacks on transgender people.He said that throughout his career he had “never seen government racial discrimination like this,” and that he felt duty bound to state his conclusion about the government’s intent.“I would be blind not to call it out,” he said.Judge Young’s ruling echoed arguments during a brief trial earlier in the day in which lawyers from an array of groups said the grants had become a political target.Kenneth Parreno, a lawyer representing the American Public Health Association, called the government’s actions part of a campaign to ban “forbidden topics” in science by canceling grants related to race or transgender health.“What this is, is a slapdash, harried effort to rubber stamp an ideological purge,” he said.The Trump administration in March began terminating a number of public health grants supporting research on topics such as health equity, racial disparities, vaccine hesitancy, and maternal health in minority communities, sometimes by mechanically scanning for certain terms.In May, Mr. Trump signed an order called “Restoring Gold Standard Science” that cited a “reproducibility crisis” and resurrected policy disputes from the Covid-19 pandemic, among other things, as justification for deep changes to the government’s role in research and development.In two separate cases that were heard together, a coalition of Democratic-led states and a coalition of unions, researchers and public health organizations each sued to stop a raft of cuts at the N.I.H., which they said jeopardized scientific progress.In hearings leading up to the ruling on Monday, Judge Young repeatedly pressed for details about the government’s decision making, expressing deep skepticism that it had followed normal, dispassionate processes in terminating the grants.

The question for the justices is whether the centers may pursue a First Amendment challenge to a state subpoena seeking donor information in federal court.Concerned that faith-based “crisis pregnancy centers” in New Jersey were misleading women, the state’s attorney general in 2023 issued a subpoena seeking information from them, including the identities of their donors.The centers sought to challenge the subpoenas in federal court on First Amendment grounds, relying on a 2021 Supreme Court decision that said California could not require all charities soliciting contributions in the state to report the identities of their major donors while leaving open the possibility of targeted subpoenas.On Monday, the court agreed to hear a challenge from the New Jersey centers that may help clarify the scope of that exception.Crisis pregnancy centers have been flash points in the abortion rights debate. Often operated by faith-based groups opposed to abortion, they offer counseling and other services to pregnant women, generally with a goal of persuading them to decide against an abortion.In his Supreme Court brief urging the justices to deny review, Matthew Platkin, the state’s attorney general, said his subpoena was meant to gather information on whether the centers had “misled donors and potential clients, among others, into believing that” they were “providing certain reproductive health care services.”The subpoena sought copies of ads and donor solicitations, substantiation for claims in them, and the identities of medical personnel at the centers and of donors who contributed using one of two websites.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Hundreds of graduate students are writing to their hometown newspapers to defend their research, as the Trump administration drastically reduces science funding.As a scientist, Erin Morrow’s focus is cerebral — literally. She studies the brain, investigating the interplay of memory and stress.But when Ms. Morrow, a graduate student at the University of California, Los Angeles, sat down to compose a letter in defense of science, she decided to write from the heart.Hers is attached to a pacemaker, implanted a few years ago to manage an atrioventricular block that made her pulse stutter.“Science saved my life,” Ms. Morrow wrote in a letter to the editor that was published this month in The Marietta Daily Journal, a Georgia newspaper. “My happy ending wouldn’t have been possible without decades of U.S. research,” she added.Ms. Morrow, 24, from Powder Springs, Ga., is one of hundreds of people who wrote to their hometown newspapers as part of a national campaign spearheaded this spring by graduate students and scientists who are just starting their careers.They wanted to draw attention to the Trump administration’s research funding cuts that are scuttling grants, shrinking science labs and stopping postdoctoral studies. Administration officials have pointed to the importance of cost-saving and attributed many of the budget cuts to changing scientific priorities. The White House has moved to cancel research in specific areas, like transgender health and climate science, and described some research efforts as wasteful spending.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Air pollution causes health problems and is attributable to some 50,000 annual deaths in the United States, but not all air pollutants pack the same punch.
Scientists have tracked the scope of “PM 2.5” pollution over decades. PM 2.5 is a size of “particulate matter” that is less than 2.5 microns in diameter. But less information was available about its even tinier cousin, described as “submicron” or “PM 1” particulate matter, which is less than 1 micron in diameter. Why does that matter? Because the “little guys” might be the source of worse health effects.
With a study now published in The Lancet Planetary Health, researchers at Washington University in St. Louis have quantified the amount of PM 1 over the United States from the past 25 years.
“This measurement serves as a starting point to understand which pollutants regulators could target to make the most effective health impact,” said Randall Martin, the Raymond R. Tucker Distinguished Professor of energy, environmental and chemical engineering in the McKelvey School of Engineering. “This effort builds upon WashU’s strengths in satellite remote sensing and modeling atmospheric aerosols that were leveraged in this study,” he added.
Chi Li, research assistant professor in Martin’s atmospheric composition analysis group, is the first author of the work. Li said these estimates will enable further investigation into both the health and environmental effects of submicron particles.
Li said the very small particles quantified in this study generally come from direct air emissions, such as the black carbon particles released by diesel engines or the smoke from wildfires. Sometimes PM 1 can also form through secondary processes when sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides are spit out through fuel combustion and burning coal.
It makes intuitive sense that smaller particles of air pollution could do more damage to the human body because they are able to slip past the body’s innate defenses. These submicron particles are at least 6 times smaller than blood cells.

Air particles are not always one single thing, but mixtures of other materials stacked together.
The larger sizes of particles are critically more dominated by components that are not easily modifiable like mineral dust, noted Li.
The researchers were able to calculate their submicron estimates based on the known ratios of what makes up PM 2.5 particles, which include seven main components such as sulfate, nitrate and mineral dust.
“Putting the seven species together, we can calculate the total PM 1 concentration over the country,” Li said.
This research sets the stage for further analysis of where, how and why certain types of particles congregate, and how they can affect the environment and human body.
“When EPA first promulgated a fine PM air quality standard in 1997, there was considerable discussion about regulating PM 1 or PM2.5,” said Jay Turner, the James McKelvey Professor of Engineering Education and co-author on the study. “For numerous reasons, including but not limited to the lack of health impacts studies for PM 1 compared to studies for PM 2.5, the latter was chosen. This study provides a comprehensive, nationwide dataset to examine PM1 impacts on health.”
A next step will involve working with epidemiologists to assess the association of PM 1 with health outcomes.

The new dataset revealed another notable fact: pollution regulation does help. Across the contiguous U.S., average PM 1 levels in the air people breathe dropped sharply from 1998 to 2022, thanks to decades of environmental regulations like the Clean Air Act. However, this progress has slowed since 2010, mainly because of rising wildfire activity. Future pollution controls will need to address emerging, non-fossil fuel sources, study authors said.
Other countries like China have a head start tracking nationwide PM 1, but now the U.S. can quickly catch up.
“This dataset offers unprecedented information for the United States about an important pollutant for which few other measurements exist,” Martin said.
Funding from National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health.

A recent survey commissioned by The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center — Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC — James) focused on Americans’ perceptions of testicular cancer. The results suggest more can be done to educate the public about the disease, which affects nearly 10,000 adults in the United States each year according to the American Cancer Society.
The OSUCCC — James survey found that only 13% of U.S. adults — just over 1 in 10 — correctly identified testicular cancer as most commonly affecting men under 40. This is significant, as the disease is most prevalent among men between the ages of 20 and 40.
Additionally, two-thirds (65%) of respondents believe an evaluation should be part of an annual exam after age 40. However, cancer experts note that self-exams are most relevant between the ages of 20 and 40.
“In my experience, a lot of men are surprised that testicular cancer is most common among young men,” said Shawn Dason, MD, urologic oncologist at the OSUCCC — James. “It’s something you’re just not expecting in your twenties or thirties. A lot of young men’s focus might be on developing their career, their day-to-day life. That’s a very different track of mind than perhaps your health.”
Survey results In the survey of 1,008 respondents aged 18 and older, 6 in 10 (63%) correctly identified that testicular cancer is often curable if caught early, and just over half (54%) correctly said that monthly self-checks should be conducted.
“We are really fortunate in testicular cancer that the vast majority of patients are diagnosed at an early stage,” said Dason, also an associate clinical professor of urology at Ohio State College of Medicine. “That means the vast majority of patients are actually diagnosed before the cancer has had an opportunity to spread to other parts of the body.”
Younger Americans, age 18-29, and adults, age 30-49, were more likely than their older counterparts to say that testicular cancer affects fertility (68% and 61%, respectively). However, younger adults were also more likely than all other age groups to incorrectly agree with the statement that testicular cancer symptoms are always painful (18%).

“Testicular cancer does not typically come with painful symptoms,” said Dason. “That’s why routine self-exams are so important to detect any lumps or changes to the testicle. If you feel something out of the ordinary, like a lump or bump, or if the testicle changes in size, call your doctor.”
Survey methodology
This survey was conducted by SSRS on its Opinion Panel Omnibus platform. The SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus is a national, twice-per-month, probability-based survey. Data collection was conducted from May 2 — May 5, 2025, among a sample of 1,008 respondents. The survey was conducted via web (n=978) and telephone (n=30) and administered in English. The margin of error for total respondents is +/-3.6 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All SSRS Opinion Panel Omnibus data are weighted to represent the target population of U.S. adults ages 18 or older.
To learn more about cancer treatment and clinical trials at the OSUCCC — James, visit cancer.osu.edu or call 1-800-293-5066.

Scientists have discovered a unique class of small antibodies that are strongly protective against a wide range of SARS coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-1 and numerous early and recent SARS-CoV-2 variants. The unique antibodies target an essential highly conserved site at the base of the virus’s spike protein, effectively clamping it shut and preventing the virus from infecting cells. The findings, published in Nature Communications, offer a promising route to developing broad-spectrum antiviral treatments that could remain effective against future viral variants.
SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind COVID-19, continues to be a potential threat as it evolves into newer variants that are resistant to currently approved antibody therapies. Resistance largely emerges because antibodies typically target virus regions, such as the receptor binding domain of the spike protein, that also frequently mutate, enabling escape from antibody recognition.
To address this, a research team led by Prof. Xavier Saelens and Dr. Bert Schepens at the VIB-UGent Center for Medical Biotechnology explored a different strategy by focusing on one of the more stable subunits of the spike protein. The so-called S2 subunit is critical for the virus’s ability to fuse with host cells, a process essential for infection, and it is more conserved across different coronaviruses.
A molecular clamp on the virus
The team turned to llamas (more specifically a llama called Winter). Llamas generate so-called single-domain antibodies, also known as VHHs or nanobodies, that are much smaller than the antibodies generated by most animals, including humans. The researchers identified several llama antibodies that strongly neutralize a broad panel of SARS coronaviruses.
What makes these antibodies particularly promising is their unique mode of action: they act like a molecular clamp. They latch onto the poorly exposed, highly conserved region (a coiled coil of 3 alpha helices) at the base of the virus’s spike protein. In doing so, they lock the spike protein in its original shape, physically preventing it from unfolding into the form the virus needs to infect cells.
The antibodies showed strong protection against infection in lab animals, even at low doses. And when researchers attempted to force the virus to evolve resistance, the virus struggled, producing only rare escape variants that were much less infectious. This points to a powerful, hard-to-evade treatment option.

“This region is so crucial to the virus that it can’t easily mutate without weakening the virus itself,” explains Schepens, senior author of the study. “That gives us a rare advantage: a target that’s both essential and stable across variants.”
Better treatments
This discovery marks a significant advancement in the quest for durable and broadly effective antiviral therapies, offering hope for treatments that can keep pace with viral evolution.
“The combination of high potency, broad activity against numerous viral variants, and a high barrier to resistance is incredibly promising,” adds Saelens. “This work provides a strong foundation for developing next-generation antibodies that could be vital in combating not only current but also future coronavirus threats.”
This research was made possible with financial support from, among others, the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO), EOS, EU Horizon 2021, and Exevir.

New results from a clinical trial reveal that a single dose of psilocybin — a naturally occurring psychedelic compound found in mushrooms — can provide sustained reductions in depression and anxiety in individuals with cancer suffering from major depressive disorder. The findings are published by Wiley online in CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society.
People with cancer often struggle with depression. In this phase 2 trial, 28 patients with cancer and major depressive disorder received psychological support from a therapist prior to, during, and following a single 25-mg dose of psilocybin.
During clinical interviews conducted 2 years later, 15 (53.6%) patients demonstrated a significant reduction in depression, and 14 (50%) had sustained depression reduction as well as remission. Similarly, psilocybin reduced anxiety for 12 (42.9%) patients at 2 years.
An ongoing randomized, double-blind trial is currently evaluating up to two doses of 25 mg of psilocybin versus placebo as treatment for depression and anxiety in patients with cancer. This study is building on the single-dose study in an effort to bring a larger majority of the patients into remission of depression and anxiety.
“One dose of psilocybin with psychological support to treat depression has a long-term positive impact on relieving depression for as much as 2 years for a substantial portion of patients with cancer, and we’re exploring whether repeating the treatment resolves depression for more than half of the patients,” said lead author Manish Agrawal, MD, of Sunstone Therapies. “If randomized testing shows similar results, this could lead to greater use of psilocybin to treat depression in patients with cancer.”

2 hours agoShareSaveEmma StanleyBBC News, LancashireShareSaveHandoutA former footballer has told how he was in “complete shock” after being diagnosed with blood cancer – after first believing the pain was from a pulled muscle.Mel Tottoh was diagnosed with myeloma after months of rib and back pain.The father-of-three, from Freckleton in Lancashire, when to the GP after feeling a “searing pain” that made him feel like he had broken a rib when taking a swing on the golf course in 2021.”When I was diagnosed, I had holey bones in my ribs, thighs, spine and skull,” said the 68-year-old, who played for Preston North End in the 1980s.He said he had twinges in his ribs and back for a year and a half before his diagnosis, but initially put them down to playing a lot of golf.When the pain got worse in the middle of 2020, he consulted his GP who told him he had likely pulled a muscle and that the twinges would sort themselves out.Handout”It progressed over months to being quite debilitating,” he recalled. “It got to a point where it started having a real impact on my life.”After blood tests he was diagnosed with myeloma in August 2021. “Being struck down with this was a complete shock,” he said. “My dad had died of cancer and then, in the last 12 years, two of my brothers died of cancer. I thought it was the end.”But the team at Blackpool Victoria Hospital “were amazing”, he said. Mr Tottoh had radiotherapy to treat the damage to his bones. He then had chemotherapy, followed by a stem cell transplant and has been in remission since November 2022.’Positive mindset’Throughout, the support of family and friends has been invaluable, he said.”It takes a small army to get you through this ordeal,” said Mr Tottoh, who is still on maintenance treatment to keep his cancer at bay for as long as possible. “The most important thing now is having people in your corner, people who care, people who lift you up when you’re down. “My family and closest friends have done that.”Nearly five years on from his diagnosis, Mr Tottoh is now determined to make memories with his family and his grandson Theo, nine.”My mindset is really positive,” he said. “I will see my grandson go to university and get married – if that’s what he wants to do. I will see my kids fulfil their dreams. “Right now, I’m in an amazing place and I’m on the path to living with myeloma for a very long time.”He said if anyone feels unsure about any symptoms they may have, they should visit the doctor.”Nobody knows your body better than you, so own it,” he said.MyelomaMyeloma is an incurable blood cancer that occurs in the bone marrowDespite being the third most common type of blood cancer, myeloma is difficult to detect as symptoms are often linked to general ageing or minor conditionsWhile it is incurable, myeloma is treatable in the majority of casesTreatment can lead to periods of remission but the cancer will inevitably come backSource Myeloma UKMore on this storyRelated internet links

20 minutes agoShareSaveHugh PymHealth editorLesley HitchenBBC NewsShareSaveBBCAs a nurse who supports terminally ill patients to die in their own homes, Angelina Blair sees first hand the last few hours of people’s lives.”There are times where you put on a brave face, you smile, you give the care that’s right and when you leave the patient’s home you go and talk to your colleagues or maybe shed a few tears,” she says.”Even if I’ve dealt with four deaths in a day, I’ve been able to have a family say that it was great, that mum, dad, sister was at home where they wanted to be.”She works for Rowcroft Hospice in Torquay, Devon, which supports 2,500 patients and their loved ones each year, most of whom choose to die in their own homes.It is one of more than 200 hospices represented by the charity Hospice UK. These are at the centre of palliative (end-of-life) care in the country – and as a result, at the centre of the current debate over the assisted dying bill, too.The bill would allow terminally ill adults with six months or less to live the right to medically end their lives in England and Wales. A key Commons vote is expected to take place this Friday which would determine whether the bill progresses to its next parliamentary stage.Many in support of assisted dying say it would give terminal patients autonomy about how they die. But many of those opposed to it argue that policymakers should instead focus on improving palliative care, and some worry that patients undergoing end-of-life care would feel pressured to have an assisted death.BBC News visited Rowcroft hospice to understand what staff think about that debate. We found uncertainty over how legalising assisted dying would affect their services, and concern about funding shortages.”I feel very passionately about people having a choice about their life and what quality of life somebody lives with,” Angelina says. “But being involved in actually administering medication that would end somebody’s life knowingly, I don’t know.”Hospices are not fully paid for by the government. Three quarters of Rowcroft’s income comes from charity, such as fundraising events, legacies and donations from local people.Rowcroft has only 12 inpatient beds as most of its patients opt to die at home, but other hospices have had to keep beds empty and lay off staff because of cost pressures.Recent increases in employer national insurance contributions could hardly have come at a worse time, according to sector leaders. And according to Hospice UK, the death rate in the UK is expected to increase over the next two decades, such that by 2040, about 130,000 more people in the UK are expected die each year than in 2023.”I have no doubt, personally, if the [assisted dying] bill became law, that would be fully funded,” says Rowcroft’s chief executive Mark Hawkins.”Shouldn’t the government be funding palliative and end-of-life care now, to a greater extent, to ensure that we all have access to the best possible end-of-life and palliative care?”The Department of Health says £100 million extra was provided to adult hospices in England this year for buildings and equipment and that the government is committed to ensuring every person has access to high quality and compassionate end-of-life care.Jabez Petherick has incurable kidney cancer. He was transferred to Rowcroft after several weeks in hospital, during which he says he had dark and desperate times because of the pain. But he says hospice care has made a big difference.”I used to go to bed, dread waking up, didn’t want to wake up, I didn’t want to wake up, because I knew the pain would start as soon as I woke up,” he says. “And gradually it stopped. And I don’t know how they did it but thank goodness they did.”The shifting views of patients in some cases is something which Jo Jacobs, a staff nurse, has noticed.”I feel that it’s very easy when patients first come in that they feel like they want to end their life, but they change their minds. “And it’s allowing patients to have that choice, but then also it could be quite scary that they’ve opted to end their life, but in a few weeks’ time they’re saying something completely, very different.”Respecting a patient’s right to choose is all important, says Vicky Bartlett, the director of patient care at Rowcroft. “For my patients that I’m caring for, I want them to be able to make an informed choice,” she says.”And I want that choice to be around assisted dying, if that becomes law, but I also want that choice to be around palliative care.”Hospices have a lot to think about as the debate on the bill progresses. Hospice UK has welcomed a new clause in the bill which requires the government to consult with palliative and end-of-life providers.But its chief executive Toby Porter argues there is still a lot to consider. “It is inevitable that a change in the law would create many complex and often competing challenges,” he says.”But the precise nature of those challenges will not be apparent until there is clarity on where assisted dying would sit in the health and social care system, and the role hospices might be expected to play.”He says the bill has given no details on this and there has been no formal consultation with hospices.Pain is a key symptom for many terminally ill patients and having the choice to free oneself from the extremes of it and have a dignified death is what drives many of those in support of assisted dying. The message from Rowcroft is that if it is made legal they will have to weigh up a number of factors, including the views of the local community and staff, before deciding whether to provide that option to patients.Since recording our interview Jabez has sadly died. He and his family granted the BBC permission to use his words after his death, to pay tribute to the staff at Rowcroft.Family handout