Attempting to eliminate funding for certain kinds of “woke” studies, the Trump administration erased hundreds of millions of dollars being used for cancer research.

The post علماء يطبعون أورام ثلاثية الأبعاد للاستفادة منها في علاج أمراض السرطان appeared first on عرب هاردوير.

Elon Musk may be gone from the Trump administration — and his friendship status with President Donald Trump may be at best uncertain — but his whirlwind stint in government certainly left its imprint. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), his pet government-slashing project, remains entrenched in Washington. During his 130-day tenure, Musk led DOGE in eliminating about 260,000 federal employee jobs and gutting agencies supporting scientific research and humanitarian aid. But to date, DOGE claims to have saved the government $180 billion — well short of its ambitious (and frankly never realistic) target of cutting at least $2 trillion from the federal budget. And with Musk’s departure still fresh, there are reports that the federal government is trying to rehire federal workers who quit or were let go. For Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, DOGE’s tactics will likely end up being disastrous in the long run. “DOGE came in with these huge cuts, which were not attached to a plan,” she told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. Kamarck knows all about making government more efficient. In the 1990s, she ran the Clinton administration’s Reinventing Government program. “I was Elon Musk,” she told Today, Explained. With the benefit of that experience, she assesses Musk’s record at DOGE, and what, if anything, the billionaire’s loud efforts at cutting government spending added up to. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. What do you think Elon Musk’s legacy is? Well, he will not have totally, radically reshaped the federal government. Absolutely not. In fact, there’s a high probability that on January 20, 2029, when the next president takes over, the federal government is about the same size as it is now, and is probably doing the same stuff that it’s doing now. What he did manage to do was insert chaos, fear, and loathing into the federal workforce. There was reporting in the Washington Post late last week that these cuts were so ineffective that the White House is actually reaching out to various federal employees who were laid off and asking them to come back, from the FDA to the IRS to even USAID. Which cuts are sticking at this point and which ones aren’t?First of all, in a lot of cases, people went to court and the courts have reversed those earlier decisions. So the first thing that happened is, courts said, “No, no, no, you can’t do it this way. You have to bring them back.” The second thing that happened is that Cabinet officers started to get confirmed by the Senate. And remember that a lot of the most spectacular DOGE stuff was happening in February. In February, these Cabinet secretaries were preparing for their Senate hearings. They weren’t on the job. Now that their Cabinet secretary’s home, what’s happening is they’re looking at these cuts and they’re saying, “No, no, no! We can’t live with these cuts because we have a mission to do.”As the government tries to hire back the people they fired, they’re going to have a tough time, and they’re going to have a tough time for two reasons. First of all, they treated them like dirt, and they’ve said a lot of insulting things. Second, most of the people who work for the federal government are highly skilled. They’re not paper pushers. We have computers to push our paper, right? They’re scientists. They’re engineers. They’re people with high skills, and guess what? They can get jobs outside the government. So there’s going to be real lasting damage to the government from the way they did this. And it’s analogous to the lasting damage that they’re causing at universities, where we now have top scientists who used to invent great cures for cancer and things like that, deciding to go find jobs in Europe because this culture has gotten so bad.What happens to this agency now? Who’s in charge of it?Well, what they’ve done is DOGE employees have been embedded in each of the organizations in the government, okay? And they basically — and the president himself has said this — they basically report to the Cabinet secretaries. So if you are in the Transportation Department, you have to make sure that Sean Duffy, who’s the secretary of transportation, agrees with you on what you want to do. And Sean Duffy has already had a fight during a Cabinet meeting with Elon Musk. You know that he has not been thrilled with the advice he’s gotten from DOGE. So from now on, DOGE is going to have to work hand in hand with Donald Trump’s appointed leaders.And just to bring this around to what we’re here talking about now, they’re in this huge fight over wasteful spending with the so-called big, beautiful bill. Does this just look like the government as usual, ultimately?It’s actually worse than normal. Because the deficit impacts are bigger than normal. It’s adding more to the deficit than previous bills have done. And the second reason it’s worse than normal is that everybody is still living in a fantasy world. And the fantasy world says that somehow we can deal with our deficits by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. That is pure nonsense. Let me say it: pure nonsense.Where does most of the government money go? Does it go to some bureaucrats sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue? It goes to us. It goes to your grandmother and her Social Security and her Medicare. It goes to veterans in veterans benefits. It goes to Americans. That’s why it’s so hard to cut it. It’s so hard to cut it because it’s us. And people are living on it. Now, there’s a whole other topic that nobody talks about, and it’s called entitlement reform, right? Could we reform Social Security? Could we make the retirement age go from 67 to 68? That would save a lot of money. Could we change the cost of living? Nobody, nobody, nobody is talking about that. And that’s because we are in this crazy, polarized environment where we can no longer have serious conversations about serious issues. See More:

Image by Getty / FuturismRx/MedicinesBroken ice cream machines aren't the only thing bedeviling stalwart fast food chain McDonald's.Financial services firm Redburn Atlantic put the company's stock in the bear category, coinciding with a slumpy week in which it lost about three percent of its value — because analysts are betting that GLP-1 agonist weight loss drugs like Ozempic are going to disrupt the fast food business model, CBS News reports.The eyebrow-raising conclusion comes as the analysts reason that people with lower incomes who go on the drugs will tend to shun food outside the home. Meanwhile, people at a higher income level who take Ozempic and similar go back to their food spending habits after a year or so."Behaviour changes extend beyond the individual user — reshaping group dining, influencing household routines and softening habitual demand," wrote the analysts, as reported by CBS. "A 1 percent drag today could easily build to 10 percent or more over time, particularly for brands skewed toward lower income consumers or group occasions."This could have a huge impact on the bottom line of fast food chains like McDonald's, which could stand to lose as much as $482 million annually as they see the disappearance of 28 million visits from formerly hungry customers.This is all complete speculation at this point, because only about six percent of American adults are currently taking these weight loss medications. And they're prohibitively expensive, prices starting at around $900 per month, meaning that extremely few poor people are currently able to afford them.But there's a movement by some policymakers to lower the price of the drugs, which have been proven to not just help people lose weight, but they come with a rash of benefits from preventing certain cancers to treating addictions, among other positives.So if lawmakers force a reduction in price in the future, expect fast food chains like McDonald's to be left holding the bag.And maybe that's a good thing, because the kind of fried foods that McDonald's traffics in are just plain bad for your health.More on Ozempic: Doctors Concerned by Massive Uptick in Teens Taking OzempicShare This Article

Businesses in highly-regulated industries like financial services, insurance, pharmaceuticals, and health care are increasingly turning to AI-powered tools to streamline complex and sensitive tasks. Conversational AI-driven interfaces are helping hospitals to track the location and delivery of a patient’s time-sensitive cancer drugs. Generative AI chatbots are helping insurance customers answer questions and solve problems. And agentic AI systems are emerging to support financial services customers in making complex financial planning and budgeting decisions.  “Over the last 15 years of digital transformation, the orientation in many regulated sectors has been to look at digital technologies as a place to provide more cost-effective and meaningful customer experience and divert customers from higher-cost, more complex channels of service,” says Peter Neufeld, who leads the EY Studio+ digital and customer experience capability at EY for financial services companies in the UK, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.  DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT For many, the “last mile” of the end-to-end customer journey can present a challenge. Services at this stage often involve much more complex interactions than the usual app or self-service portal can handle. This could be dealing with a challenging health diagnosis, addressing late mortgage payments, applying for government benefits, or understanding the lifestyle you can afford in retirement. “When we get into these more complex service needs, there’s a real bias toward human interaction,” says Neufeld. “We want to speak to someone, we want to understand whether we’re making a good decision, or we might want alternative views and perspectives.”  But these high-cost, high-touch interactions can be less than satisfying for customers when handled through a call center if, for example, technical systems are outdated or data sources are disconnected. Those kinds of problems ultimately lead to the possibility of complaints and lost business. Good customer experience is critical for the bottom line. Customers are 3.8 times more likely to make return purchases after a successful experience than after an unsuccessful one, according to Qualtrics. Intuitive AI-driven systems— supported by robust data infrastructure that can efficiently access and share information in real time— can boost the customer experience, even in complex or sensitive situations.  Download the full report. This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. This content was researched, designed, and written entirely by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.