Search

Reports on the decision of United States President George W. Bush to limit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. Conflict regarding stem cell research; Allowance of research on existing stem cell lines; How Bush came to his decision; Details of his televised speech to the U.S.

Focuses on the debate over the use of human stem cells extracted from frozen embryos. Speculation regarding whether United States President George W. Bush will allow federal money to be used for stem cell research; Perceived importance of Bush's decision to his political future; Mention of Republicans who support the research; Description of the capabilities of and possible uses for stem cells.

Tucson AZ(SPX) Sep 09, 2021 With scientists beginning to more seriously consider constructing bases on celestial bodies such as the moon, the idea of space mining is growing in popularity. [...]

Bloomington IN (SPX) Sep 09, 2021 New research by Indiana University professor Natasha MacBean, supported by a NASA grant, aims to better understand dryland ecosystems, which cover about 40 percent [...]

College Park MD (SPX) Sep 02, 2021 Stephanie Lansing, professor in the Department of Environmental Science and Technology at the University of Maryland (UMD), is leading two new grants totaling [...]

Research Triangle Park NC (SPX) Aug 31, 2021 With the addition of sensors and enhanced communication tools, providing lightweight, portable power has become even more challenging. Army-funded research demonstrated a [...]

Washington DC (SPX) Aug 03, 2021 Today, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Science announced a plan to provide $100 million over the next four years for university-based [...]

Bremen, Germany (SPX) Jul 28, 2021 Extremely fast, energy-efficient, fail-safe - and extremely complex: The German government is funding research on the next generation 6G wireless systems with up to [...]

Washington DC (SPX) Jul 28, 2021 the Department of Energy's Office of Science (SC) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced $9.35 million for 21 research projects in High-Energy [...]

The approval granted by America's Food and Drug Administration to a new drug to combat Alzheimer's disease was hailed as a breakthrough, even though the FDA conceded that the drug, [...]

The article discusses a debate in the House of Commons led by Paul Blomfield regarding research and development funding and the United Kingdom's association with Horizon Europe. It emphasized the importance of research and development for the country's growth and productivity, and highlighted the significant contributions made by universities to the economy through innovative research and argued that association with Horizon Europe was crucial.

Unlike many patients, Wallach and Abrevaya had inside knowledge of how the federal government funds projects - and scores of political contacts (Wallach, who is still very much alive, is also an alum of the Obama administration). Abrevaya says that by banding with other philanthropists and the political machinery, her organization is creating a multiplier effect - not only for her husband's illness but for related neurodegenerative diseases, which include Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer's. Atlantic's strict due diligence still serves as a proxy for other philanthropists: By contributing to organizations Feeney has given to, a donor can be reasonably assured the money will be used wisely. He can see a future where something as basic as the public funding of science research is replaced with private money - a concern if climate-change denier/philanthropist Rebekah Mercer were to be involved. [Extracted from the article]

The author discusses the growth of technology research and business in China. She mentions the efforts of the Chinese government to improve the amount rather than the quality of technological research, the private internet startup companies that developed technology in competition, and whether these companies will continue to innovate if they are co-opted by the government.

Argues for the notion of state funding of research. Researchers' complaints about the lack of public funds; Entrepreneurs and philanthropists as the main supporters of science in previous centuries; Contributions of academia to industry; Findings about the usefulness of government-funded research; Fields of research in which public funding is of central importance.

Looks at the issues raised by the failure of GCA Corp., a company funded by a consortium organized for fostering development of advanced semiconductor technology known as SEMATECH (Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology). Government funding for SEMATECH operations; Background information on GCA Corp.; Issues concerning the organization of such consortia and government funding for such endeavors. INSET: The anatomy of a stepper, by L.P.R..

Recommends a plan for the renewal of U.S. federal support for research in mathematics. Impact of the Mansfield Amendment of the 1970 Military Procurement Authorization law on fundamental work in mathematics; Steps taken by universities to cope with the financial problems caused by the federal aid cuts on mathematical research; Reasons why mathematics fared worse than the other basic sciences in terms of federal support.

This article presents information on the decision of the U.S. to cut funding for science research. Federal funding for research, at $75 billion, has dropped more than 3% in real dollars since 1994. U.S. President Bill Clinton's proposed budget, the next five years look even grimmer, with a 14% decline scheduled. What's more, science luminaries charge, industry has cut back on long-range fundamental research. The U.S. is failing to lay the research groundwork for tomorrow's new products and industries. Without increases for basic science it will be impossible to maintain its position as the technological leader of the world.

The article presents world news briefs on various topics. In the U.S., the federal aid for research and development for this year will see major cutbacks. A law was passed by the state legislature of Arkansas, which stated that creationism should be included in the curricula of public schools along with evolution. A team of biochemists of the People's Republic of China has directly synthesized the transfer ribonucleic acid for the first time.

The article reports developments about science and politics in the U.S. Under the President Ronald Reagan administration the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 1982 increases the funding of research and development by 8.7 percent over 1980. The National Defense University organized in 1976 a major interdisciplinary study to investigate possible global climatic changes to the year 2000.

From semiconductors to supercomputers, jumbo jets to HDTV, technology is probably the single most important factor driving the evolution of global competition. Little wonder, then, that the national debate about the competitiveness of U.S. industry--and government's role in improving it--is increasingly about technology policy. Proponents of technology policy argue that at a time when U.S. companies are steadily losing market share in strategic high-tech sectors, government support for R&D on "critical technologies" is absolutely essential. Critics counter that however painful the loss of market share by U.S. companies might be, any governmental cure would be far worse than the disease. According to former IBM chief scientist Lewis Branscomb, neither of these positions captures what is really at stake in the technology policy debate. The issue isn't whether the United States should have a technology policy--it already does--but what kind of government policies and programs make sense in the new competitive environment. For 40 years, government policies have emphasized increasing the supply of new technologies--mainly through the funding of defense-related R&D and the development of military technologies. But in the global economy, what matters is not necessarily knowing how to create new technologies but how to absorb and apply new innovations quickly--no matter where they have originated. Branscomb redirects the technology policy debate by describing an alternative approach. He argues that government should stimulate demand for innovative ideas at companies across the industrial spectrum--by encouraging collaborative research, investing in technological infrastructure, and helping companies improve their capacity to adapt innovations to specific business needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When it comes to the U.S. government's role in technological competition, we have come to the end of one era and the beginning of the next. So argues Simon Ramo, dean of America's technology managers. In the 1950s, government created the market for high-technology production through defense spending. Nuclear strategy engendered a "demand" for high-tech research; products and processes of high technology were highly secret and its spin-off for consumer products was often limited. Now, however, the government is properly focused on the technology of strategic defense, defensive weapons, and aids to verification of arms control treaties--like smart robotics, advanced computer architectures and networks, and spy satellites. This technology research benefits the consumer economy much more than the construction of nuclear warheads. At the same time, the line between civilian and military technology is blurring. Technology, in short, is becoming ubiquitous, and the nations of the world are heading for an era of greater openness, if only to facilitate continued technological competition, alliance, and exchange. In this world, the government's chief responsibility is not the demand for technology but cultivating the "supply"--engineers who can contribute to making companies competitive. To meet that responsibility, the government has to improve American education in all its phases. Elementary and secondary schools need to concentrate more on math and science. The faculties of our schools of engineering need revitalizing. Universities should try to develop a "greater engineering" program, which initiates students to the real world of competition. Business schools should introduce future managers to the fundamentals of technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports on the move by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services to take a stricter policy about the disposition of its funds given as research grants to some of the leading universities. It explains that move is in response to loose accounting policy by universities on how research grants from the federal government are spent. Stricter accounting policy should prevent research scientists to spend the grants for the reason intended and not based on what they saw fit.

The article focuses on the slowdown of U.S. innovation. It states that the government and industry research funding fell into 6% in noninflationary or real dollars due to the increasing costs, growing government regulation, and failure rates of new products. It says that innovation has been challenged by the increasing concentration of products into fewer and larger companies. Meanwhile, high and low-technology manufacturers who felt the costs and risk of innovation seek for outside assistance.

The article investigates methods to slowdown the process of aging by researchers in the U.S. Drugs and nostrums that promise to restore youthfulness have always been big business. The business is booming as never before with the rapid aging of the American population. Since Congress founded the National Institute on Aging in 1975, research funding has jumped from $15.8 million to $195 million in 1988.

The article offers information that "Advanced Grants" has been awarded to Austrian researchers by the European Research Council (ERC) for funding basic research. It reports that researchers including Rudolf Grimm, Gerhard Widmer, Jan-Michael Peters and Thomas Henzinger have been awarded with the grants. It highlights the research in efficient algorithms which reduces running time, costs and electricity demand of a hardware, as of the year 2021.

The article reveals the financial setback facing members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) as the U.S. government ordered a 13% cut in federal research support for colleges and universities. It says that the biggest blow is the cutback in National Science Foundation (NSF) grants which increased by only 10 million U.S. dollars in1969 from its 1968 budget. AAAS will call on the U.S. Congress to change its federal funding system and to ask that researchers be informed early about how much they will receive in a fiscal year.

This article discusses the size and implications of the U.S. federal research grants that colleges and universities receive. As of 1963 federal research and development (R&D) money that go into colleges amounts to 1.2 billion a year, which could reach to 2.5 billion by 1970. Questions are being raised about this trend, such whether college professors are being kept from doing their real job and whether the money are being spent properly.

The article presents developments related to scientific discoveries in 1950s in the U.S. The Hoover Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government has recommended to the U.S. Congress an increase in Federal financial support for basic and medical research. The U.S. government has signed bilateral agreements to more than twenty countries to share nuclear information and materials. Atomic Energy Commissioner Willard F. Libby has indirectly confirmed the speculation about the fission-fusion-fission bomb.

The article reports on the move of the state and federal governments to put up more money for research in the U.S. It mentions that the federal government has increased expenditures for research under the National Institute for Mental Health by 2.6 million and both federal and state governments have spent something like 200 million dollars a year for new mental hospitals. It also notes the state governments have agreed at a governors' conference to adopt a 10-point program for research.

In the summer of 1968, American scholars of South Asian studies found their research in India jeopardized by disclosure in the New Delhi, India, Parliament that the University of California, Berkeley, California, Himalayan Border Countries Project was to be financed for three years in the amount of $282,844 by the United States Department of Defense. This project had been in existence on a modest scale for several years under civilian, nongovernmental sponsorship. The region is politically sensitive, and India's response to the Defense Department connection was vigorous; the project died. There seems to have been pre-existing doubts about the aims and desirability of all foreign social science research, but the suspicions were exacerbated by the disclosures and resultant political clamor regarding the Himalayan Project.

The article mentions federal aid to scientific research, in light of concerns about national security in postwar United States. The Office of Scientific Research and Development released a booklet, "Science: The Endless Frontier," by Dr. Vannevar Bush, which supports aid to fundamental research and research partnerships with the armed services. Technological innovation has four stages--fundamental research, applied research, engineering development, and production engineering. Examples include General Electric Company with its product-development laboratories and Polaroid Corporation whose alliance with universities has also developed practical applications. Topics are the proposed National Science Foundation, distribution of funds, and patents in fundamental research.

Tucson AZ (SPX) Jan 15, 2021A team of scientists led by Christopher Hamilton of the University of Arizona is gearing up to send drones on exploration missions across a vast [...]

Binghamton NY (SPX) Jan 12, 2021 A team of researchers from Binghamton University has been selected to receive $2.6 million from the U.S. Department of Energy Solar Energy Technologies Office [...]

London, UK (SPX) Jan 07, 2021 Through the UK Space Agency, the government is giving a cash injection to 5 projects specifically designed to bring together UK business expertise with [...]

Researchers from The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research and two other institutions have been awarded a $52 million, five-year grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) to lead [...]

Abu Dhabi UAE (SPX) Nov 11, 2020 Three innovative agriculture companies will develop cutting-edge projects in Abu Dhabi to boost the emirate's agriculture technology (AgTech) capabilities across land, sea and [...]