Data from the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism indicates that alcohol consumption in the U.S. has risen overall. But research from the National Institute on Drug Abuse shows that lifetime drinking, past month drinking, and past year drinking among young people began to decline around the year 2000. That means that such declines have especially impacted Generation Z, defined as anyone born from 1997 to 2012, and some Millennials, born between 1981 and 1996. A 2023 survey from Gallup found that the share of adults under age 35 who say they ever drink dropped ten percentage points in two decades, to 62% in 2021-2023 from 72% in 2001-2003. “It is becoming clear that, for whatever reasons, today’s younger generations are just less interested in alcohol and are more likely than older generations to see it as risky for their health and to participate in periods of abstinence like Dry January,” said National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism George F. Koob in a statement. There isn’t one clear reason for alcohol’s decline among Gen Z, but experts point to a variety of factors. One may be changing laws, including the 1984 National Minimum Drinking Age Act, which set the age to purchase or publicly possess alcoholic beverages to 21. Prior to that, the minimum age to drink was 18. Alcohol’s social reputation has also changed. “It makes sense that older drinkers are drinking more, given that Baby Boomers were steeped in a heavier drinking culture,” said Koob. Adds Sybil Marsh, a physician specializing in family medicine and addiction: “There was a time where drinking some alcohol was a badge of maturity and was sophisticated. But now, it's only one out of a whole range of ways that people can relax or show sophistication and so on.” Marijuana could be a part of that shift. The drug is legal in nearly half of all U.S. states for recreational use. Nearly 80% of Americans live in a county with at least one cannabis dispensary, according to the Pew Research Center, and cannabis has been put into drinks being marketed to younger consumers. Koob says it's unclear whether the decline in drinking among Gen Z Americans has to do with a preference for drugs. The 2023 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that 36.5% of adults aged 18 to 25 consumed marijuana in the past year. And if you look at marijuana use across a lifetime, some 1 in 2 adults in the same age range have at least tried marijuana, according to the same study. Still, that study showed alcohol use in the past year exceeded marijuana use, with 68.1% of the same age group consuming alcohol. Another contributing factor has to do with the changing socialization patterns of younger generations. “Alcohol tends to be a social drug, even for young people, so part of the decline in underage drinking could be related to less in-person socializing,” said Koob. On average, the amount of time people spent with friends in-person decreased from 30 hours a month in 2003 to 10 hours a month in 2020, according to the U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory on the epidemic of loneliness. That decline was especially marked for people aged 15 to 24. Marsh says that younger generations are much more interested in living healthy lifestyles than generations past, and evolving alcohol marketing tactics reflect those changing values. “If you look at alcohol marketing, they're sort of stopping short of saying it's healthy to have some drinks, but that drinking can be part of a healthy lifestyle,” she says, “as opposed to the Gen X type of marketing, which was like, ‘party hard.’” There’s been a wave of sober bars opening across the U.S.—Hekate in New York City, Sans Bar in Austin, and The Sober Social in Atlanta, to name a few—to accommodate for changing attitudes about alcohol. Emerson Haven, a 26-year-old stage director and student based in New York City, occasionally drinks in social settings, but often opts for a sober night out for health reasons. “There’s a history of alcoholism in my family, so I'm just careful about it. I never drink alcohol if I feel like I'm having a bad day, because I don't want to create that association,” he says. “And then sometimes I just don't enjoy the feeling of being drunk.”

The last of 2024 is in the rearview mirror. But before forgetting it ever existed, consider reflecting on everything good and bad and weird and inspiring that happened to you over the past 12 months. “When we stop and stand and look back at where we’ve been, and how we felt when we were there, it can serve as a blueprint for where we want to go forward,” says Caroline Fenkel, chief clinical officer with the virtual mental-health platform Charlie Health. By asking yourself a series of probing questions, you’ll become more self-aware and figure out how to make changes that can boost your happiness and well-being in the New Year. Think of it as a “gentle inventory, rather than a high-stakes self-assessment,” she adds. Where to start? Ask yourself who and what strengthens or drains you. These insights can help you better manage your energy. Fenkel likes to regularly take inventory of what's adding a net positive to her life, for example—like taking care of the ducks in her pond—and what registers as a net negative, like spending too much time on social media. If something makes you particularly happy, “do it over and over and over again,” she says. (More duck-feeding for Fenkel in 2025.) We asked experts to share what we ought to ask ourselves at the start of 2025 to make it our best year yet. Branded Content XPRIZE at the 2025 TIME100 Summit: Making the Impossible, Possible By XPRIZE 1. What brought me genuine joy last year? And what took it away? Take a moment to reflect on what made you happiest over the past year—and don't overthink it. Whatever pops into your mind was a “peak experience,” says Lauren Farina, a psychotherapist in Chicago. “It reveals our truest, most authentic desires, beyond what we've been conditioned to believe we should be doing or what we’re expected to be doing.” Once you’ve landed on your happiest moments, brainstorm practical ways to integrate more of those experiences into your day-to-day life in 2025. Maybe you took a trip to Sedona and were flooded with the kind of awe you haven't felt since you were a kid. You probably can't visit every weekend, but you could commit to other ways of spending more time in nature wherever you live, Farina suggests. Read More: What to Expect at Your First Therapy Session It’s equally important to reflect on what stole your energy or diminished your spirits over the past year. What kind of boundaries can you set to limit those stressful experiences? What can you let go of or delegate to someone else? “Our feelings are messengers, and it’s our job to decipher those,” Farina says—and to make smart changes accordingly. 2. Which relationships felt nourishing, and which depleted me? Your relationships with other people are core to your happiness, Fenkel points out. Some feed you, while others zap all your energy. Take some time to figure out who falls into which category. Then, make it a point to prioritize the connections that energize you, while taking a step back from the ones that deplete you. “Detach with love,” she advises. “You have to protect yourself, and that's OK.” That doesn’t necessarily mean cutting the draining person out of your life; rather, you might set boundaries around how much time you spend together, or clearly communicate expectations for interactions. 3. How balanced did my time feel between work, family time, social commitments, and rest? Looking back, you might realize you leaned too heavily into one of these areas at the expense of others. If work dominated your 2024, think through how you can protect more of your personal time; or, if you didn't show up professionally the way you hoped, brainstorm how you’ll shift into a new gear. “It's so tough to live a balanced life, but the only way you're going to have that balance is if you stop and reflect on it,” Fenkel says. She suggests getting into the habit of doing this kind of check-in quarterly: “OK, here are the number of days I took off work last quarter and didn't check my Slack or my email at all.” Having that type of hard data on hand will help you carve out time for what's most important to you, she says. 4. What should I say no to? What would I like to say yes to? If you need to get better acquainted with a certain two-letter word in 2025, start by examining the barriers that are keeping you from saying no. You might worry, for example, that you're going to let people down, that you won't be loved anymore, or that your friends will be mad at you, says Gabrielle Morse, a licensed mental health counselor in New York City. “Whether it’s physical discomfort or resentment, there are all sorts of things that come up emotionally from putting our needs last,” she says. Eventually, your bitterness about prioritizing other people will bubble over, tarnishing your relationships and happiness. Read More: Is Intermittent Fasting Good or Bad for You? On the other hand, maybe you need to say yes more, especially to things you feel like you have deprioritized because of other obligations. Lots of people stifle their own desires, like leaning into creative pursuits, to accommodate others, Morse points out. “This is an invitation to ask yourself what you want,” Morse says. “It could end up being meaningful and fulfilling.” 5. What positive qualities did I notice in myself in 2024? When people reflect on their year, they often tick off accomplishments, like getting promoted at work. “They reduce themselves to this one thing, and they're so much more than that,” says Morse. “What’s so much more important are the qualities they're able to see in themselves.” She suggests thinking about ways you’ve grown or shown strength and resilience—or been true to your authentic self. Maybe you made progress breaking old patterns, like people-pleasing, Morse points out, or set new boundaries with family. Perhaps you persevered through a challenging health diagnosis or another hardship that could have knocked you down. Celebrate those wins—they’ll help ensure the upcoming year is your best yet. 6. What am I most proud of and grateful for over the past year? Most people are conditioned to focus on what’s going wrong. (Fires don’t put themselves out, after all.) Give yourself a break and instead reflect on something positive, Farina says, like what you're particularly proud of or grateful for. “That can shift our perspective to filter in more of what goes right, and more of what brings us joy,” she says. “It's a way of seeing our subconscious with a new belief system”—and that will serve you well throughout the New Year. 7. How can I make peace with last year's problems? This is one of Farina’s favorite ways to turn challenges into opportunities. “Problems or crises are invitations or opportunities to evolve,” she says. You might realize, for example, that in order to come to terms with your stressful job, you need to practice mindfulness; or, to improve your relationship with your mother-in-law, you’ll need to work on becoming a better communicator. Read More: 9 Ways to Embrace Winter—Even if You Think You Hate It Maybe something life-altering happened to you in 2024, and you’ll need to adopt a new mindset or communication strategy in order to cope. “Within a crisis or loss or trauma is an opportunity for you to grow,” Farina says. 8. Are my goals specific and attainable? Targeted goals can keep you on track, but vague ones can derail you. If you want to get in shape, for example, better to commit to working out for 30 minutes every morning than simply vowing to “exercise more” or burning yourself out with three-hour gym sessions. Read More: The Surprising Benefits of Talking Out Loud to Yourself “You want something that's very specific and that you can actually do,” says Dr. Ashley Zucker, a psychiatrist with Kaiser Permanente Southern California. “It might seem like it's not a high enough goal, but it's a great place to start. You can always add to it later.” Similarly, try not to overdo the number of goals you're working on at any one time; one or two is ideal, Zucker says. Otherwise, there’s a good chance you’ll get overwhelmed and spend more time stressing than achieving. 9. Am I being kind to myself? No matter how your year goes, you’re going to have bad days. Be honest: Do you extend yourself enough grace when you hit these road bumps? One of Zucker’s favorite questions to ask herself is: “What would I say if my daughter was in this situation?” “Play that out in your head,” she says, talking to yourself the way you would your loved one. And remember: “There’s always tomorrow, and there’s always later today. Give yourself those second, third, fourth, and fifth opportunities.” 10. What would I do in 2025 if I weren't afraid? Reflecting on what you would do if you weren't consumed with worry can help expose the ways fear plays a role in your daily life. “It’s not that we should never make decisions out of fear,” Farina adds. “But we should at least pause before defaulting to a fear-based choice.” By considering the ways that being afraid is holding you back, you might take a leap of faith in 2025 that changes the course of your year for the better.

Do you feel overwhelmed by daily tasks? Catch yourself thinking negative or pessimistic thoughts? Blame your high cortisol levels, influencers would have you believe. Online, cortisol—commonly called the “stress hormone”—is a hot topic and frequent scapegoat. Type “cortisol levels” or “howtoreducecortisol” into TikTok, and you’ll be met with hundreds of millions of posts, name-dropping the hormone as responsible for everything from a puffy face (#cortistolface) to a bloated midsection. There are just as many hacks for how to handle it. Beauty and wellness brands have also jumped on the cortisol bandwagon and released products, sometimes marketed as “anti-stress,” that claim to reduce cortisol. Advertisement Considering that stress has become a bogeyman for everything that ails us, it’s perhaps not surprising that people are zeroing in on tamping down the hormone aligned with it. But what exactly is cortisol? Do we really need to be fixated on our levels? And when can we fairly blame it for health issues? How cortisol works The cortisol fixation has made its way from the internet to doctors' offices. And people have questions. “In all my years of being a doctor, I’ve never heard cortisol being mentioned so much by patients,” says Dr. Molly McBride, an ob-gyn and women’s health specialist in New York City. “Now with TikTok running amok, everybody is asking for cortisol checks.” More in Health The Scientific Search for Youth Why Do I Keep Having Recurring Dreams? Dermatologists Have a Dirty Little Secret The Best Longevity Habit You’re Not Thinking About Personal Trainers Share the No. 1 Tip That Has Changed Their Lives Cortisol is a hormone synthesized from cholesterol that is produced by the adrenal glands. When we are stressed or in fight-or-flight mode, the brain kicks off a process that results in the body producing cortisol. “Cortisol then stimulates our body to increase blood pressure and metabolize fats, carbohydrates, and protein so we have the energy to respond to the stressor,” says Dr. David Kim, a dermatologist in New York City. Cortisol is essential for regulating circadian rhythms and reacting to internal and external stressors. “It really is an adaptive hormone,” critical for our acute stress response and the recovery from it, says Rajita Sinha, a neuroscientist and professor of psychiatry at Yale School of Medicine. We all have cortisol, in other words, and we all need it.

Sara Sidner, anchor and senior national correspondent for CNN, told the audience at the TIME100 Health Impact Dinner on Tuesday night that she did 16 rounds of chemotherapy after she was diagnosed with stage III breast cancer in 2023—and worked the entire time through it. The room erupted into loud applause. “It is possible to live your life while trying to kill cancer,” Sidner said. “We’ve come such a long way, and I just quickly want to say to this room: whoever is in this room that is a nurse, a doctor, a physician, a researcher, someone who is creating drugs for us—thank you. Thank you for the research. Thank you for your work; we need it so, so much.” Advertisement Sidner was joined onstage by Dr. Vinod Balachandran, surgeon-scientist and director of the Olayan Center for Cancer Vaccines at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Victor Bulto, president of the U.S. unit for Novartis, which sponsored the event in New York City. The three appeared on a panel moderated by TIME senior health correspondent Alice Park to discuss the groundbreaking innovations in cancer detection, treatment, and prevention—and the research that still needs to be done. Sidner, who is a 2025 TIME Closers honoree, said she hadn’t always planned on publicly sharing her cancer diagnosis. But when she learned she had stage III breast cancer, she realized she wouldn’t be able to keep it a secret from everyone. “You have spent your life telling other people’s stories—maybe this is something you need to tell, and tell it in a really honest, sometimes embarrassing, way. Tell people what it’s like going through this journey,” she recalled thinking.

Angela Haupt by Angela Haupt Haupt is a health and wellness editor at TIME. Before you write off punctuation as little more than a dot, a line, or some combination of both, consider: A period can end a conversation—or an entire relationship. One too many question marks can make the recipient ask themselves if they really want to keep talking to you. Forgetting an exclamation point can spark the wrong kind of excitement. As digital communication has evolved, punctuation’s job description has gotten more demanding. When you fire off a text or Slack message, “You don't have the context we have with spoken language,” says Anne Curzan, a professor of English, linguistics, and education at the University of Michigan. “You don't have facial expressions, you don't have tone, you don't have the shared context of a physical space and gestures.” Is the person you’re talking to happy? Are they joking? Are they angry? Are they drop-dead serious? If you were face-to-face, “You’d have all of this context to be able to figure it out,” she says. “In texting, you have very little—so what young people in particular have done is repurpose punctuation.” That means those tiny symbols, in conjunction with emojis and abbreviations like “JK” and “LOL,” have become tools used to capture tone and facial expression, while making clear not only what you're trying to say, but how you're trying to say it. “We have to minimize ambiguity, because we're not going to be there to clarify,” Curzan says. “So we have to get it right the first time.”

Anew study found that the rates of pregnancy-related death in the U.S. increased by nearly 28% between 2018 and 2022, with large disparities based on state, race, and ethnicity. The study, published in JAMA Network Open on April 9, analyzed four years of nationwide data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers found that there were 6,283 pregnancy-related deaths during that time. The study determined that the rate increased from 25.3 pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births in 2018 to a peak of 44.1 in 2021, before dropping slightly to 32.6 in 2022. The increase occurred across all the age groups that researchers analyzed, but people between the ages of 25 and 39 experienced the highest increase, according to the study. Advertisement The study didn’t investigate why the rates of pregnancy-related death increased over the four-year period. But researchers noted in the study that the COVID-19 pandemic could have had an impact on maternal health and the health care system at large, particularly in 2021. Dr. Rose Molina, one of the study’s authors and an ob-gyn at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, says she and her colleagues observed “a large variation by state” in the rates of pregnancy-related death. Alabama had the highest at 59.7 deaths per 100,000 live births, followed by Mississippi at 58.2. Meanwhile, California had the lowest rate at 18.5 deaths per 100,000 live births, followed by Minnesota at 19.1. Molina says some explanations for the disparities could be variation in access to prenatal, labor and delivery, and postpartum care, as well as in state Medicaid coverage. “There really shouldn’t be this level of variation across the states, and we need to do better across all the states,” Molina says. “One of the points we made in that article was that if all states could have performed as well as the highest performing state, like California, we could have avoided 2,679 pregnancy-related deaths” in that four-year period.

Dr. Peter Marks is the kind of health official both Democrats and Republicans used to admire. He served in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for 13 years, most of them as director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. There, Marks oversaw the critical process of reviewing and approving vaccines—like those against COVID-19—and biologic therapies, including gene- and cell-based treatments. Marks earned trust and respect from academic and industry scientists as well for his emphasis on requesting the strongest evidence in evaluating new therapies, and for his willingness to support new technologies and approaches. Advertisement But he did not last long in the new Trump Administration. On March 28, Marks resigned after he says he was pressed by Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials to come in line with skepticism about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines or be fired. He says his team was also asked by HHS to turn over sensitive health information from the database the FDA maintains with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to track adverse reactions to vaccines. Concerned about how the data would be used, Marks refused and resigned. (HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story.) Now, he is warning of a fundamental change at HHS and the FDA—one he believes is already proving to be very dangerous. “What I saw at the agency was an increasing anti-vaccine tone," he told TIME On April 8. "I was hoping to work through it, but it was very clear to me that they just didn’t want to work through it.”

During a Zoom interview, Maury Purnell, 85, hangs in the air, firmly grasping a trapeze bar, answering questions and smiling, no less. He manages it all in a plaid button-up shirt instead of gym clothes. “Several of my peers are having health issues,” he says. “I’ve been fortunate with all of that in recent years.” Purnell is enjoying unique health for his age, and research shows a clear relationship between what he’s exhibiting right now—impressive grip strength—and longevity. “It’s a strong marker of risk for future clinical outcomes, most notably premature death,” says Dr. Darryl Leong, a cardiologist at McMaster University in Canada. Advertisement But that doesn’t necessarily mean you should become obsessed with pumping a squeeze ball daily. Despite Purnell’s display of hand strength on the trapeze, he’s never focused specifically on improving his grip. It’s always been a byproduct. Here’s why grip is a key indicator of health—and how to keep it strong. What grip strength tells you Grip strength is simply the amount of force with which you can squeeze your hand—whether that’s holding a handrail or cracking a walnut between your thumb and forefinger (ouch). A weak grip is associated with physical disability and dying earlier from all kinds of diseases, including heart disease.

New data reveal that the majority of abortions that were provided in most states in 2023 were medication abortions—a pattern that reproductive health experts say underscores the need to protect access to abortion pills. The Guttmacher Institute, which researches and supports sexual and reproductive health and rights, released on Feb. 27 an analysis of state-level data on medication abortion in 2023. Guttmacher researchers had previously found that medication abortions accounted for 63% of all abortions provided by clinicians in 2023 in states without the most restrictive policies—most states, in other words—and the data released on Thursday expanded on that finding by breaking that number down by state. A full 95% of abortions performed in Wyoming were medication abortions, and 84% of abortions in Montana were. Lowest were Washington, D.C., at 44%, and Ohio, at 46%, according to the report. Researchers also looked at how women were receiving medication abortion: whether through prescriptions from in-person clinics or via telemedicine. In states without near-total abortion bans or bans on telemedicine provision, about 10% of abortions in 2023 were provided by online-only clinics, ranging from 7% in states like New York and California to as high as 60% in Wyoming. “What these data are telling us is that medication abortion is a critical option for folks in most states without total abortion bans, and we’re also seeing that in some states, telemedicine is playing a pretty major role,” says Isabel DoCampo, senior research associate at the Guttmacher Institute and one of the lead authors of the analysis. “What this communicates is that lawmakers shouldn’t support efforts to curtail medication abortion or telemedicine access for medication abortion, and that these options need to be expanded. Medication abortion is an option with high demand, with high need in most states without total abortion bans, and access to medication abortion via any means shouldn’t be restricted.” Restoring a city’s charm Branded Content Restoring a city’s charm By China Daily The two-drug regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol is the most common medication abortion method that U.S. providers offer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone to be used for abortions more than 20 years ago, and years of research have found the drug to be both safe and effective. But recently, mifepristone has faced attacks from anti-abortion activists and some politicians, including through court challenges. Read More: How the Biden Administration Protected Abortion Pill Access—and What Trump Could Do Next The analysis published on Thursday is part of the Guttmacher Institute’s Monthly Abortion Provision Study, an ongoing project that shares monthly estimates of abortions provided by clinicians in states without near-total bans. Researchers survey providers and use a statistical model to estimate data. The project started when the Guttmacher Institute saw a “need for more frequent data collection and more frequent reporting” in an era of quickly changing policies on abortion, after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, DoCampo says. The research team focused on abortions provided at both brick-and-mortar facilities and online-only providers in states that didn’t have near-total abortion bans in 2023. DoCampo says one of the reasons the team decided not to include states with near-total bans was to protect providers’ confidentiality. Some abortion shield laws offer protections for providers prescribing abortion pills via telemedicine and sending them to patients in states with bans or restrictions, but New York’s law is currently being tested through two legal challenges in Louisiana and Texas. Read More: What Are Abortion Shield Laws? Because the team didn’t include data from states with near-total bans or include self-managed abortions, DoCampo says, “If we’re thinking about all abortions occurring in the U.S., our numbers reflecting medication abortion provision are likely an undercount, and medication abortion likely plays an even greater role in the U.S. abortion access landscape.” The data also show that even states that have many different characteristics have similar proportions of medication abortion provision. For instance, Wyoming is a rural state with low population density and, at the time, it had a near-total ban on abortion and a first-of-its-kind ban on medication abortion. (Wyoming’s abortion bans were later blocked.) Delaware, meanwhile, has a higher population density and protective abortion policies. But in both states, medication abortion accounts for a high proportion of abortions. “It’s likely that there’s a constellation of factors at the state level” influencing the proportion of medication abortion, DoCampo says, such as abortion policies, insurance reimbursement rates for medication vs. procedural abortion, and the number of clinics operating in the state. Ushma Upadhyay—a professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California, San Francisco and a member of the university’s Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health program—was not affiliated with the Guttmacher Institute’s research and says she was “delighted” to see this data breakdown by state. With so much variation in factors like abortion policy and insurance coverage, which all impact abortion access and preferences, this type of data is “incredibly valuable,” she says. “These rates show that restrictions are ineffective; when it comes to abortion, people are going to do what they need to to access abortion care,” Upadhyay says. “I think that this is exactly why anti-abortion activists are coming after medication abortion—they can see that people are able to access it, there’s more and more research that it is safe and effective, [and] patients enjoy the level of autonomy that it provides them.” Upadhyay says she thought the team’s methodology was “very strong.” But she wishes the report discussed in greater detail the role that insurance plays in this area, and agrees that the data were likely undercounting the prevalence of medication abortion because states with near-total abortion bans weren’t included in the analysis. Some of the states the Guttmacher team looked at have abortion restrictions, such as Georgia, Florida, and Iowa, which all ban abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy. Upadhyay notes that some of those states had high proportions of medication abortion, including Georgia at 83%. “That is a perfect illustration of the power that medication abortion has; it’s across the country,” she says. “People are accessing it more and more, and they’re able to use it despite the increasing number of restrictions in states.

As the new head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is now in charge of disbursing $35 billion a year, the largest amount of funding for biomedical research in the world. That is, if he continues the NIH’s support of the research that has been behind many medical breakthroughs, including mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Bhattacharya emerged during the pandemic as a critic of the government and its response, and gained notoriety for claiming that federal health officials were assessing the risk of the pandemic all wrong. He argued that masking and lockdowns were misguided policies fueled by a skewed analysis of only the most severe COVID-19 cases among people who were hospitalized or died. As the new head of NIH, it’s likely similar questioning of how data is interpreted will permeate the types of grants the Institutes will fund; the day after he was confirmed as NIH’s new director, according to some NIH employees, they received an email asking for a comprehensive list of contracts exhibiting censorship and misinformation, listing the dangers of COVID-19 and not wearing masks as examples.