PERSPECTA

News from every angle

Results for "Bethesda"

46 stories found

5 Best Bethesda Games To Try First
Culturescreen-rant1mo ago

5 Best Bethesda Games To Try First

Few game studios enjoy the beloved reputation Bethesda has, and there are a handful of great entry points to its developed and published games.

New Free RPG Attracts Elder Scrolls and Fallout Fans
Culturescreen-rant11d ago

New Free RPG Attracts Elder Scrolls and Fallout Fans

A new free open-world RPG is being highlighted as an ideal game for fans of classic Bethesda titles, specifically drawing comparisons to Morrowind and appealing to Fallout enthusiasts. The game offers a similar experience that is recommended for players of these beloved franchises.

How Bhattacharya's NIH Is Rethinking China, DEI, And High‑Risk Labs
Politicszerohedge2mo ago

How Bhattacharya's NIH Is Rethinking China, DEI, And High‑Risk Labs

How Bhattacharya's NIH Is Rethinking China, DEI, And High‑Risk Labs Authored by Jeff Louderback, Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), For decades, scientists have looked at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as an agency that publishes papers, according to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health, in Washington, on Feb. 8, 2026. Irene Luo/The Epoch Times Under President Donald Trump’s second term, the emphasis for NIH funding has shifted to “provable, testable hypotheses, not ideological narratives,” he said, which is resulting in widespread reforms to the agency. Bhattacharya, who obtained both a doctorate in economics and a medical degree from Stanford University within three years of each other, outlined changes that the NIH has implemented in his first year as the agency’s director and talked about his vision for the next three years in an interview with Epoch Times Senior Editor Jan Jekielek. The NIH has been instrumental in medical advances for decades, Bhattacharya said, but in the 21st century, it became “much more of a staid institution, not willing to take intellectual risks.” During the same time, the agency “was willing to take risks on dangerous gain-of-function and other social agendas, like DEI, that it had no business really engaging in.” “I think the NIH now, under my leadership, under President Trump’s leadership, and under what Secretary [Robert F.] Kennedy is looking over … is focused on actually addressing the chronic health problems of this country, reversing the flatlining of life expectancy, and making good on its mission ... research that improves the health and longevity of the American people, and the whole world,” he said. One of the 13 agencies managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, the NIH is the largest supporter of biomedical research globally, providing 85 percent of all biomedical research funding worldwide, according to Bhattacharya. It funds about $50 billion in scientific research via grants to hundreds of thousands of researchers at academic institutions and hospitals, he said. The NIH is not an agency that makes decisions or policies about public health directly, Bhattacharya said, noting that he intends to “remove the politicization of science that has existed for decades.” The National Institutes of Health Gateway Center in Bethesda, Md., on June 8, 2025. During President Donald Trump’s second term, National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said the agency “is focused on actually addressing the chronic health problems of this country.” Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters/File Photo Political Agendas Over the past 15 to 20 years, the NIH has incorporated political rather than scientific agendas, Bhattacharya told The Epoch Times. “Probably the most prominent example of this is DEI—diversity, equity and inclusion,” he said. “If you were a researcher outside the NIH, the ticket to getting sort of extra, relatively easy funds was to promise to do DEI research. Looking into it, much of that research had no real scientific basis at all. I don’t even characterize this as science.” As an example, Bhattacharya used a project that studied the question: “Is structural racism the root reason why African Americans have worse hypertension results than other races?” “The problem with that hypothesis is that there’s no way to test it,” he said. “If structural racism is the cause, then what control group can you have to test the idea that that is true? ... None of that actually translated over to better health for anybody, much less for African Americans. “Scientists of the country understand that if they want NIH support, they need to propose projects that have the chance of improving the health of people rather than achieving some ideology that should not belong at the NIH.” The NIH has redirected its funding since Trump took office for his second term. That includes allocating funds for “early career scientists,” Bhattacharya said. President Donald Trump (C) speaks as National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (2nd L) looks on during a press conference at the White House on May 12, 2025. The NIH redirected its funding priorities after Trump began his second term. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Funding Changes There should be “fundamental changes” with the way the NIH funds educational institutions, Bhattacharya said, and he intends to work with Congress “to make [this] happen.” On Jan. 5, a federal appeals court ruled that the Trump administration cannot reduce the amount of money the NIH pays grant recipients for indirect costs, including administration and facility maintenance. The ruling applies to three lawsuits filed by the attorneys general of Massachusetts and 21 other states, as well as hospitals, schools, and the associations that represent them. The NIH published a guidance document in February 2025 to limit how much grant funding could flow to research institutions to cover their indirect costs. These are costs that cannot be directly attributed to an individual research project and include expenses related to funding equipment, facilities, and research staff. The guidance document states that these indirect costs could not exceed 15 percent of funding for direct research costs, regardless of the costs incurred at universities. The NIH stated that Johns Hopkins, Yale, and Harvard charged in excess of 60 percent for indirect costs, even though they had billions of dollars in endowments. Attorneys for those who filed suit said small universities don’t have such large endowments and that if the guidance took effect, there would be many layoffs, stalled clinical trials, and laboratory closures. “If you don’t have amazing scientists who can win the grants, you’re not going to get the facility support. But in order to attract excellent scientists to your institution, you have to have excellent facilities. It’s the kind of Catch-22 that guarantees that our funding from the NIH is going to be concentrated in relatively few institutions,” Bhattacharya said. Scientists at schools such as the University of Alabama, the University of Oklahoma, and the University of Kansas deserve access to funding like Stanford and Harvard, he said. A researcher studies skin wound healing in a lab at the University of Illinois Chicago in Chicago on March 5, 2025. On Jan. 5, a federal appeals court ruled that the Trump administration could not limit the percentage amount the National Institutes of Health pays grant recipients for indirect costs, including administrative expenses and facility maintenance. Scott Olson/Getty Images Dealing With China The NIH must be “very careful about how we fund research relationships with China, especially post-pandemic,” Bhattacharya said. “The U.S. invested in the Chinese biomedical research enterprise. Almost every single top Chinese biomedical research scientist of note was funded in some part by the NIH. Many were trained in the United States, so we invested heavily in that,” he said. “Post-pandemic, and especially given the geopolitical circumstances we are in now, it looks, in retrospect, like it wasn’t all that wise an investment.” The NIH must implement more secure measures with foreign research, he said, referencing the collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. “In the case of Wuhan, what happened was that the NIH funded … Eco Health Alliance, which had a sub-award relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Bhattacharya said. “When the pandemic happened, and the NIH had an interest in getting the lab notebooks of what exactly was studied in Wuhan, the Eco Health Alliance essentially delayed reporting at all about what it knew had happened,” Bhattacharya said. “They ultimately said, ‘Oh, well, we don’t control Wuhan Institute of Virology. We can’t get the lab notebooks.’” He noted that the NIH “funded research in collaboration with China that was actually quite dangerous and may indeed have led to the pandemic.” Under Bhattacharya, the NIH now has more stringent auditing processes with domestic and foreign institutions. “If it is NIH-funded, then [the domestic and the foreign institutions] have to have direct auditing relationships united with the NIH,“ he said. ”Then the NIH can shut off money to the foreign institution, if it’s not cooperating. ... It’s called a sub-project system. It’s one of the first things that I did.” Read the rest here... Tyler Durden Thu, 02/19/2026 - 21:45