researchers

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

The international team discovered how the immune system is kept in check to prevent it attacking the body.

The Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine has been awarded to Mary E Brunkow, Fred Ramsdell and Shimon Sakaguchi for their work on the functioning of the human immune system.

The award, announced by Sweden’s Karolinska Institute on Monday, will be presented to the trio in December for “their groundbreaking discoveries concerning peripheral immune tolerance that prevents the immune system from harming the body”.

The research “relates to how we keep our immune system under control so we can fight all imaginable microbes and still avoid autoimmune disease”, said Marie Wahren-Herlenius, a rheumatology professor at the Karolinska Institute.

The prize of 11 million Swedish kronor ($1.17m) is to be shared equally between Brunkow and Ramsdell of the United States and Japan’s Sakaguchi. The king of Sweden will also present them with gold medals.

“Their discoveries have laid the foundation for a new field of research and spurred the development of new treatments, for example for cancer and autoimmune diseases,” the prize-awarding body said in a statement.

The prize for medicine kicks off the annual Nobel awards, arguably the most prestigious prizes in science, literature, peace and economics. The winners of the remaining prizes will be announced over the coming days.

US President Donald Trump has asserted numerous times that he should receive the Nobel Peace Prize, having claimed to have halted seven wars since taking office at the start of the year.

However, regardless of apparent resistance among the assemblies that select the winners, the US president is unlikely to receive this year’s peace prize, as nominations had to be made in January.

This is a developing news story. More to come…

NEW YORK — Scientists have identified the origins of the blue color in one of Jackson Pollock’s paintings with a little help from chemistry, confirming for the first time that the Abstract Expressionist used a vibrant, synthetic pigment known as manganese blue.

“Number 1A, 1948,” showcases Pollock’s classic style: paint has been dripped and splattered across the canvas, creating a vivid, multicolored work. Pollock even gave the piece a personal touch, adding his handprints near the top.

The painting, currently on display at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, is almost 9 feet wide. Scientists had previously characterized the reds and yellows splattered across the canvas, but the source of the rich turquoise blue proved elusive.

In a new study, researchers took scrapings of the blue paint and used lasers to scatter light and measure how the paint’s molecules vibrated. That gave them a unique chemical fingerprint for the color, which they pinpointed as manganese blue.

The analysis, published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first confirmed evidence of Pollock using this specific blue.

“It’s really interesting to understand where some striking color comes from on a molecular level,” said study co-author Edward Solomon with Stanford University.

The pigment manganese blue was once used by artists, as well as to color the cement for swimming pools. It was phased out by the 1990s because of environmental concerns.

Previous research had suggested that the turquoise from the painting could indeed be this color, but the new study confirms it using samples from the canvas, said Rutgers University’s Gene Hall, who has studied Pollock’s paintings and was not involved with the discovery.

“I’m pretty convinced that it could be manganese blue,” Hall said.

The researchers also went one step further, inspecting the pigment’s chemical structure to understand how it produces such a vibrant shade.

Scientists study the chemical makeup of art supplies to conserve old paintings and catch counterfeits. They can take more specific samples from Pollock’s paintings since he often poured directly onto the canvas instead of mixing paints on a palette beforehand.

To solve this artistic mystery, researchers explored the paint using various scientific tools — similarly to how Pollock would alternate his own methods, dripping paint using a stick or straight from the can.

While the artist’s work may seem chaotic, Pollock rejected that interpretation. He saw his work as methodical, said study co-author Abed Haddad, an assistant conservation scientist at the Museum of Modern Art.

“I actually see a lot of similarities between the way that we worked and the way that Jackson Pollock worked on the painting,” Haddad said.

Ramakrishnan writes for the Associated Press.

NEW YORK — An executive order signed by President Trump this week aims to give political appointees power over the billions of dollars in grants awarded by federal agencies.

Scientists say it threatens to undermine the process that has helped make the U.S. the world leader in research and development.

The order issued Thursday requires all federal agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, to appoint officials responsible for reviewing federal funding opportunities and grants, so that they “are consistent with agency priorities and the national interest.”

It also requires agencies to make it so that current and future federal grants can be terminated at any time — including during the grant period.

Agencies cannot announce new funding opportunities until the new protocols are in place, according to the order.

The Trump administration said these changes are part of an effort to “strengthen oversight” and “streamline agency grantmaking.” Scientists say the order will cripple America’s scientific engine by placing control over federal research funds in the hands of people who are influenced by politics and lack relevant expertise.

“This is taking political control of a once politically neutral mechanism for funding science in the U.S.,” said Joseph Bak-Coleman, a scientist studying group decision-making at the University of Washington.

The changes will delay grant review and approval, slowing “progress for cures and treatments that patients and families across the country urgently need,” the Assn. of American Medical Colleges said in a statement.

The administration has already terminated thousands of research grants at agencies such as the NSF and NIH, on topics including transgender health, vaccine hesitancy, misinformation, and diversity, equity and inclusion. It has also threatened funding for scientific research in its battle with prominent universities, including Harvard and UCLA.

The order could affect emergency relief grants doled out by FEMA, public safety initiatives funded by the Department of Justice and public health efforts supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Experts say the order is likely to be challenged in court.

Ramakrishnan writes for the Associated Press.

New Delhi, India – Getting into one of the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) schools was supposed to be the end of the financial woes for Paras* and his family. Instead, things have only worsened due to the federal government’s long delays in dispensing Paras’s monthly fellowship allowance of 37,000 rupees ($435).

At the IIT, Paras is a research fellow, looking into solutions to a global public health crisis created by the spread of infectious diseases. His fellowship comes from the INSPIRE scheme, funded by India’s Department of Science and Technology (DST).

But delays in the scheme’s payment have meant that Paras was not able to pay the instalments on the laptop he bought for his research in 2022. His credit score plummeted, and his savings plans crashed.

Paras’s parents are farmers in a drought-affected region of western India, and their income depends on a harvest that often fails. So, he has resorted to borrowing money from friends, including as recently as between August and December, he told Al Jazeera.

Paras is not alone. Al Jazeera spoke to nearly a dozen current and former fellows enrolled in top institutes across India under the Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research (INSPIRE) programme. The interviewees studied at institutions such as the IIT, a network of engineering and technology schools across the country, and the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research, another network.

All had gone from three to as long as nine months without a stipend.

The funding delays and procedural lapses have marred the fellowship and impaired their research capacity, they said.

Many researchers recently took to social media to complain, tagging Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Minister of Science and Technology Jitendra Singh.

“For over a year now, many of us who are pursuing PhDs under DST-funded fellowships have not received our stipends,” Sayali Atkare, an INSPIRE fellow, wrote on LinkedIn. “This has pushed many young researchers into severe financial and emotional stress.”

Last year, India ranked 39th in the Global Innovation Index of 133 countries, up one spot from the year prior. It leads lower-middle-income countries like Vietnam and the Philippines in innovation. China leads upper-middle-income countries and is followed by Malaysia and Turkiye.

The federal government termed the ranking an “impressive leap” in a news release. It said that India’s “growing innovation potential has been supported by government initiatives that prioritise technological advancement, ease of doing business, and entrepreneurship”.

At a federal government conference in April, Modi boasted of India’s growing research acumen. Under his leadership in the past decade, the government has doubled its gross spending on research and development from 600 billion rupees ($7.05bn) to more than 1,250 billion rupees ($14.7bn), while the number of patents filed has more than doubled – from 40,000 to more than 80,000.

The numerous steps taken by the government – like doubling of expenditure on R&D (research and development), doubling of patents filed in India, creation of state-of-the-art research parks and research fellowships and facilities – ensure “that talented individuals face no obstacles in advancing their careers”, Modi said.>

However, an analysis of government documents, budgets and interviews with researchers reveals that the government is more focused on commercial research, primarily product development led by start-ups and big corporations. It is offering little funding for research conducted at the country’s premier universities.

For instance, in the current financial year, 70 percent of the Science and Technology Department’s annual budget has been allocated to a scheme under which interest-free loans are provided to private companies conducting research in sunrise domains, such as semiconductors.

At the same time, the government has made misleading statements about its investments in the country’s research institutes, including with schemes like the INSPIRE fellowship, where funds have actually been cut instead of being increased as touted by the government.

Poor pay, funding delays

The INSPIRE scheme offers PhD and faculty fellowships to “attract, attach, retain and nourish talented young scientific Human Resource for strengthening the R&D foundation and base”.

The fellowships are offered to top-ranking postgraduate students and doctoral researchers to conduct research in areas from agriculture, biochemistry, neuroscience and cancer biology to climate science, renewable energy and nanotechnology.

Under the scheme, PhD fellows are to receive 37,000 rupees ($435.14) to 42,000 rupees ($493.94) per month for living expenses and 20,000 rupees ($235.21) annually for research-related costs, such as paying for equipment or work-related travel.

Faculty fellows are offered teaching positions with a monthly salary of 125,000 rupees ($1,470) and an annual research grant of 700,000 rupees ($8,232).

In the year 2024-25, 653 fellows were enrolled in the PhD fellowship, and 85 in the faculty fellowship programme.

“I couldn’t attend an important annual meeting in our field because it required travel, and I was not sure if I would get my allowance,” a faculty fellow at an institute in eastern India said. He has not received his payments since September 2024.

Atkare, the PhD student who wrote about the government’s failure on LinkedIn, also wrote, “We’ve made endless phone calls, written countless emails – most of which go unanswered or are met with vague responses. Some officials even respond rudely.”

Another INSPIRE PhD fellow told us of a running joke: “If they pick up the phone, you can buy a lottery ticket that day. It’s your lucky day.”

In May, DST Secretary Abhay Karandikar accepted that there were funding delays and said that they would soon be resolved.

Karandikar told the Hindu newspaper that he was “aware” of the disbursement crisis but said that from June 2025, all scholars would get their money on time. “All problems have been addressed. I don’t foresee any issue in the future,” he said.

Al Jazeera requested a comment from the science and technology minister, the DST secretary and the head of the department’s wing that implements the INSPIRE scheme, but has not received a response.

Dodgy math

In January, the federal government folded three R&D-related schemes to start Vigyan Dhara or “the flow of science” to ensure “efficiency in fund utilisation”. The INSPIRE scheme had been funded under one of those schemes.

But instead of efficiency, there has been chaos.

Under Vigyan Dhara, DST asked institutes to set up new bank accounts, leading to delays in payments for INSPIRE fellowships.

New Delhi also said that it had “significantly increased” funding for the Vigyan Dhara scheme, from 3.30 billion rupees ($38.39m) in the last financial year to 14.25 billion rupees ($167.58m) in the current financial year.

However, that math was incomplete. The 3.30 billion rupees ($38.39m) is what the government earmarked for the scheme, which was only launched in the last quarter of the fiscal year. The budget for the full fiscal year of the three schemes that Vigyan Dhara replaced amounted to 18.27 billion rupees ($214.93m). So, in effect, the current budget saw a 22 percent decrease in allocation from 18.27 billion rupees to 14.25 billion rupees ($167.58m).

Overall, the budget for Vigyan Dhara’s constituent schemes reduced 67.5 percent from 43.89 billion rupees ($513.2m) in financial year 2016-17 to 14.25 billion rupees ($167.6m) in financial year 2025-26.

DST officials did not respond to Al Jazeera’s query requesting clarification of Vigyan Dhara’s budgetary allocations.

Commercialisation of research

On the other hand, the Indian government earmarked 200 billion rupees ($2.35bn) for the new Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) scheme targeting the private sector.

This money is part of a larger 1-trillion-rupee ($11.76bn) corpus previously announced by India’s finance minister to provide long-term financing at low or no interest rates.

These changes in schemes are intended to make India a “product nation”, get more patents filed in India, and curb the brain drain, as Union Minister Aswini Vaishnaw and DST officials explain in different videos.

But the plight of the researchers at state-run organisations remains unaddressed.

“The government throws around big terms, but those toiling in laboratories are suffering,” said Lal Chandra Vishwakarma, president of All-India Research Scholars Association.

“Stipends should be similar to salaries of central government employees. Fellows should get their money every month without fail,” he said.

In the current scenario, most fellows Al Jazeera spoke to said that they would prefer a fellowship abroad.

“It’s not just about funds but the ease of research, which is much better in Europe and [the United States]. We get so much staff support there. In India, you get none of that,” said a professor at an IIT, who supervises an INSPIRE PhD fellow who faced funding issues.

While the private sector is being heavily financed, researchers told us they downplay their funding costs as that improves their chances of landing government research projects.

“Cutting-edge research is so fast; if we lose the first few years due to cost-cutting, we are behind our colleagues abroad,” the IIT professor said.

“Once we submit necessary documents, like annual progress reports, DST takes at least three months to release the next instalment. It’s usual,” said a PhD fellow who is a theoretical mathematician.

“Right now, I would say only people with privilege [and high-income backgrounds] should be in academia. Not because that’s how it should be, but because for others, it’s just so hard,” the IIT professor said.

*Al Jazeera has changed names to protect the identity of interviewees.