Author name: Paul Patrick

autism-rate-rises-slightly;-rfk-jr.-claims-he’ll-“have-answers-by-september“

Autism rate rises slightly; RFK Jr. claims he’ll “have answers by September“

Among the sites, there were large differences. Prevalence ranged from 9.7 per 1,000 children who were 8 years old in Texas (Laredo) to 53.1 in California. These differences are likely due to “differences in availability of services for early detection and evaluation and diagnostic practices,” the CDC and network researchers wrote.

For instance, California—the site with the highest prevalence among 8-year-olds and also 4-year-olds—has a local initiative called the Get SET Early model. “As part of the initiative, hundreds of local pediatricians have been trained to screen and refer children for assessment as early as possible, which could result in higher identification of ASD, especially at early ages,” the authors write. “In addition, California has regional centers throughout the state that provide evaluations and service coordination for persons with disabilities and their families.”

On the other hand, the low ASD rates at the network’s two Texas sites could “suggest lack of access or barriers to accessing identification services,” the authors say. The two Texas sites included primarily Hispanic and lower-income communities.

The newly revealed higher rates in some of the network’s underserved communities could link ASD prevalence to social determinants of health, such as low income and housing and food insecurity, the authors say. Other factors, such as higher rates of preterm birth, which is linked to neurodevelopmental disabilities, as well as lead poisoning and traumatic brain injuries, may also contribute to disparities.

Anti-vaccine voices

The detailed, data-heavy report stands in contrast to the position of health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime anti-vaccine advocate who promotes the false and thoroughly debunked claim that autism is caused by vaccines. Last month, Kennedy hired the discredited anti-vaccine advocate David Geier to lead a federal study examining whether vaccines cause autism, despite numerous high-quality studies already finding no link between the two.

Geier, who has no medical or scientific background, has long worked with his father, Mark Geier, to promote the idea that vaccines cause autism. In 2011, Mark Geier was stripped of his medical license for allegedly mistreating children with autism, and David Geier was fined for practicing medicine without a license.

In a media statement Tuesday in response to the new report, Kennedy called autism an “epidemic” that is “running rampant.” He appeared to reference his planned study with Geier, saying: “We are assembling teams of world-class scientists to focus research on the origins of the epidemic, and we expect to begin to have answers by September.”

Autism rate rises slightly; RFK Jr. claims he’ll “have answers by September“ Read More »

razer-built-a-game-streaming-app-on-top-of-moonlight,-and-it’s-not-too-bad

Razer built a game-streaming app on top of Moonlight, and it’s not too bad

I intentionally touched as few settings as I could on each device (minus a curious poke or two at the “Optimize” option), and the experience was fairly streamlined. I didn’t have to set resolutions or guess at a data-streaming rate; Razer defaults to 30Mbps, which generally provides rock-solid 1080p and pretty smooth 1440p-ish resolutions. My main complaints were the missing tricks I had picked up in Moonlight, like holding the start/menu button to activate a temporary mouse cursor or hitting a button combination to exit out of games.

Razer’s app is not limited to Steam games like Steam Link or Xbox/Game Pass titles like Remote Play and can work with pretty much any game you have installed. It is, however, limited to Windows and the major mobile platforms, leaving out Macs, Apple TVs, Linux, Steam Deck and other handhelds, Raspberry Pi setups, and so on. Still, for what it does, it works pretty well, and its interface, while Razer-green and a bit showy, was easier to navigate than Moonlight. I did not, for example, have to look up the launching executables and runtime options for certain games to make them launch directly from my mobile device.

Streaming-wise, I noticed no particular differences from the Moonlight experience, which one might expect, given the shared codebase. The default choice of streaming at my iPad’s native screen resolution and refresh rate saved me the headaches of figuring out the right balance of black box cut-offs and resolution that I would typically go through with Steam Link or sometimes Moonlight.

Razer built a game-streaming app on top of Moonlight, and it’s not too bad Read More »

trump-white-house-budget-proposal-eviscerates-science-funding-at-nasa

Trump White House budget proposal eviscerates science funding at NASA

This week, as part of the process to develop a budget for fiscal-year 2026, the Trump White House shared the draft version of its budget request for NASA with the space agency.

This initial version of the administration’s budget request calls for an approximately 20 percent overall cut to the agency’s budget across the board, effectively $5 billion from an overall topline of about $25 billion. However, the majority of the cuts are concentrated within the agency’s Science Mission Directorate, which oversees all planetary science, Earth science, astrophysics research, and more.

According to the “passback” documents given to NASA officials on Thursday, the space agency’s science programs would receive nearly a 50 percent cut in funding. After the agency received $7.5 billion for science in fiscal-year 2025, the Trump administration has proposed a science topline budget of just $3.9 billion for the coming fiscal year.

Detailing the cuts

Among the proposals were: A two-thirds cut to astrophysics, down to $487 million; a greater than two-thirds cut to heliophysics, down to $455 million; a greater than 50 percent cut to Earth science, down to $1.033 billion; and a 30 percent cut to Planetary science, down to $1.929 billion.

Although the budget would continue support for ongoing missions such as the Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope, it would kill the much-anticipated Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, an observatory seen as on par with those two world-class instruments that is already fully assembled and on budget for a launch in two years.

“Passback supports continued operation of the Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes and assumes no funding is provided for other telescopes,” the document states.

Trump White House budget proposal eviscerates science funding at NASA Read More »

the-trek-madone-slr-9-axs-gen-8-tears-up-the-roads-and-conquers-climbs

The Trek Madone SLR 9 AXS Gen 8 tears up the roads and conquers climbs


Trek’s top-of-the-line performance road bike offers some surprises.

The Madone SLR 9 Gen 8 AXS with Lake Michigan in the background on a brisk morning ride. Credit: Eric Bangeman

When a cyclist sees the Trek Madone SLR 9 AXS Gen 8 for the first time, the following thoughts run through their head, usually in this order:

“What a beautiful bike.”

“Damn, that looks really fast.”

“The owner of this bike is extremely serious about cycling and has a very generous budget for fitness gear.”

Indeed, almost every conversation I had while out and about on the Madone started and ended with the bike’s looks and price tag. And for good reason.

A shiny bike

Credit: Eric Bangeman

Let’s get the obvious out of the way. This is an expensive and very high-tech bike, retailing at $15,999. Part of the price tag is the technology—this is a bicycle that rides on the bleeding edge of tech. And another part is the Project One Icon “Tête de la Course” paint job on the bike; less-flashy options start at $13,499. (And if $15,999 doesn’t break your budget, there’s an even fancier Icon “Stellar” paint scheme for an extra $1,000.) That’s a pretty penny but not an unusual price point in the world of high-end road bikes. If you’re shopping for, say, a Cervélo S5 or Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL8, you’ll see the same price tags.

Madone is Trek’s performance-oriented road bike, and the Gen 8 is the latest and greatest from the Wisconsin-based bike manufacturer. It’s more aerodynamic than the Gen 7 (with a pair of aero water bottles) and a few hundred grams weightier than Trek’s recently discontinued Emonda climbing-focused bike.

I put nearly 1,000 miles on the Gen 8 Madone over a two-month period, riding it on the roads around Chicagoland. Yes, the land around here is pretty flat, but out to the northwest there are some nice rollers, including a couple of short climbs with grades approaching 10 percent. Those climbs gave me a sense of the Madone’s ability on hills.

Trek manufactures the Gen 8 Madone out of its 900 series OCLV carbon, and at 15.54 lb (7.05 kg)—just a hair over UCI’s minimum weight for racing bikes—the bike is 320 g lighter than the Gen 7. But high-tech bikes aren’t just about lightweight carbon and expensive groupsets. Even the water bottles matter. During the development of the Gen 8 Madone, Trek realized the water bottles were nearly as important as the frame when it came to squeezing out every last possible aerodynamic gains.

Perhaps the most obvious bit of aerodynamic styling is the diamond-shaped seat tube cutout. That cutout allows the seat tube to flex slightly on rougher pavement while cutting back on lateral flex. It’s slightly smaller than on the Gen 7 Madone, and it looks odd, but it contributes to a surprisingly compliant ride quality.

For the wheelset, Trek has gone with the Aeolus RSL for the Madone SLR 9. The tubeless-ready wheels offer a 51 mm rim depth and can handle a max tire size of 32 mm. Those wheels are paired with a set of 28 mm Bontrager Aeolus RSL TLR road tires. About four weeks into my testing, the rear tire developed what looked like a boil along one of the seams near the edge of the tire. Trek confirmed it was a manufacturing defect that occurred with a batch of tires due to a humidity-control issue within the factory, so affected tires should be out of stores by now.

Cockpit shot

No wires coming off the integrated handlebar and stem.

Credit: Eric Bangeman

No wires coming off the integrated handlebar and stem. Credit: Eric Bangeman

You’ll pilot the Madone with Trek’s new one-piece Aero RSL handlebar and stem combo. It’s a stiff cockpit setup, but I found it comfortable enough even on 80-plus-mile rides. Visually, it’s sleek-looking with a complete absence of wires (and the handlebar-stem combo can only be used with electronic groupsets). The downside is that there’s not enough clearance for a Garmin bike computer with a standard mount; I had to use a $70 K-Edge mount to mount my Garmin.

The Gen 8 Madone also replaces Trek’s Emonda lineup of climbing-focused bikes. Despite weighing 36 grams more than the Emonda SLR 9, Trek claims the Gen 8 Madone has an 11.3 W edge over the climbing bike at 22 mph (and a more modest 0.1 W improvement over the Gen 7 Madone at the same speed).

Of climbs and hero pulls

Paint job

The Tête de la Course colorway in iridescent mode.

Credit: Eric Bangeman

The Tête de la Course colorway in iridescent mode. Credit: Eric Bangeman

The first time I rode the Madone SLR 9 Gen 8 on my usual lunchtime route, I set a personal record. I wasn’t shooting for a new PR—it just sort of happened while I was putting the bike through its paces to see what it was capable of. It turns out it’s capable of a lot.

Riding feels almost effortless. The Madone’s outstanding SRAM Red AXS groupset contributes to that free-and-easy feeling. Shifting through the 12-speed 10-33 cassette is both slick and quick, perfect for when you really want to get to a higher gear in order to drop the hammer. At the front of the drivetrain is a 172.5 mm crank paired with 48t/35t chainrings, more than adequate for everything the local roads were able to confront me with. I felt faster on the flats and quicker through the corners, which led to more than a couple of hero pulls on group rides. The Madone also has a power meter, so you know exactly how many watts you cranked out on your rides.

There’s no derailleur hanger on the Gen 8 Madone, which opens the door to the SRAM Red XPLR groupset.

Credit: Eric Bangeman

There’s no derailleur hanger on the Gen 8 Madone, which opens the door to the SRAM Red XPLR groupset. Credit: Eric Bangeman

There’s also a nice bit of future-proofing with the Madone. Lidl-Trek has been riding some of the cobbled classics with the SRAM Red XPLR AXS groupset, a 13-speed gravel drivetrain that doesn’t need a derailleur hanger. Danish all-arounder Mads Pedersen rode a Madone SLR 9 Gen 8 with a single 56t chainring up front, paired with the Red XPLR to victory at Gent-Wevelgem at the end of March. So if you want to spend another thousand or so on your dream bike setup, that’s an option, as the Madone SLR 9 Gen 8 is one of the few high-performance road bikes that currently supports this groupset.

Living in northeastern Illinois, I lacked opportunities to try the new Madone on extended climbs. Traversing the rollers in the far northwestern suburbs of Chicago, however, the bike’s utility on climbs was apparent. Compared to my usual ride, an endurance-focused road bike, I felt like I was getting the first few seconds of a climb for free. The Madone felt lightweight, nimble, and responsive each time I hit an ascent.

What surprised me the most about the Madone was its performance on long rides. I went into testing with the assumption that I would be trading speed for comfort—and I was happy to be proven wrong. The combination of Trek’s aerodynamic frame design (which it calls IsoFlow), carbon wheelset, and tubeless tires really makes a difference on uneven pavement; there was almost no trade-off between pace and comfort.

What didn’t I like? The water bottles, mainly. My review bike came equipped with a pair of Trek RSL Aero water bottles, which fit in a specially designed cage. Trek says the bottles offer 1.8 W of savings at 22 mph compared to round bottles. That’s not worth it to me. The bottles hold less (~650 ml) than a regular water bottle and are irritating to fill, and getting them in and out of the RSL Aero cages takes a bit of awareness during the first few rides. Thankfully, you don’t need to use the aero bottles; normal cylindrical water bottles work just fine.

The price bears mentioning again. This is an expensive bike! If your cycling budget is massive and you want every last bit of aerodynamic benefit and weight savings, get the SLR 9 with your favorite paint job. Drop down to the Madone SLR 7, and you get the same frame with a Shimano Ultegra Di2 groupset, 52t/36t crank, and a 12-speed 11-30 cassette for $7,000 less than this SLR 9. The SL 7, with its 500 Series OCLV carbon frame (about 250 grams heavier), different handlebars and fork, and the same Ultegra Di2 groupset as the SLR 7 is $2,500 cheaper still.

In conceiving the Gen 8 Madone, Trek prioritized aerodynamic performance and weight savings over all else. The result is a resounding, if expensive, success. The color-shifting Project One paint job is a treat for the eyes, as is the $13,499 Team Replica colorway—the same one seen on Lidl-Trek’s bikes on the UCI World Tour.

At the end of the day, though, looks come a distant second to performance. And with the Gen 8 Madone, performance is the winner by a mile. Trek has managed to take a fast, aerodynamic road bike and make it faster and more aerodynamic without sacrificing compliance. The result is a technological marvel—not to mention a very expensive bike—that is amazing to ride.

Let me put it another way—the Madone made me feel like a boss on the roads. My daily driver is no slouch—a 5-year-old endurance bike with SRAM Red, a Reserve Turbulent Aero 49/42 wheelset, and Continental GP5000s, which I dearly love. But during my two-plus months with the Madone, I didn’t miss my bike at all. I was instead fixated on riding the Madone, dreaming of long rides and new PRs. That’s the way it should be.

Photo of Eric Bangeman

Eric Bangeman is the Managing Editor of Ars Technica. In addition to overseeing the daily operations at Ars, Eric also manages story development for the Policy and Automotive sections. He lives in the northwest suburbs of Chicago, where he enjoys cycling and playing the bass.

The Trek Madone SLR 9 AXS Gen 8 tears up the roads and conquers climbs Read More »

chrome’s-new-dynamic-bottom-bar-gives-websites-a-little-more-room-to-breathe

Chrome’s new dynamic bottom bar gives websites a little more room to breathe

The Internet might look a bit different on Android soon. Last month, Google announced its intent to make Chrome for Android a more immersive experience by hiding the navigation bar background. The promised edge-to-edge update is now rolling out to devices on Chrome version 135, giving you a touch more screen real estate. However, some websites may also be a bit harder to use.

Moving from button to gesture navigation reduced the amount of screen real estate devoted to the system UI, which leaves more room for apps. Google’s move to a “dynamic bottom bar” in Chrome creates even more space for web content. When this feature shows up, the pages you visit will be able to draw all the way to the bottom of the screen instead of stopping at the navigation area, which Google calls the “chin.”

Chrome edge-to-edge

Credit: Google

As you scroll down a page, Chrome hides the address bar. With the addition of the dynamic bottom bar, the chin also vanishes. The gesture handle itself remains visible, shifting between white and black based on what is immediately behind it to maintain visibility. Unfortunately, this feature will not work if you have chosen to stick with the classic three-button navigation option.

Chrome’s new dynamic bottom bar gives websites a little more room to breathe Read More »

a-guide-to-the-“platonic-ideal”-of-a-negroni-and-other-handy-tips

A guide to the “platonic ideal” of a Negroni and other handy tips


Perfumer by day, mixologist by night, Kevin Peterson specializes in crafting scent-paired cocktails.

Kevin Peterson is a “nose” for his own perfume company, Sfumato Fragrances, by day. By night, Sfumato’s retail store in Detroit transforms into Peterson’s craft cocktail bar, Castalia, where he is chief mixologist and designs drinks that pair with carefully selected aromas. He’s also the author of Cocktail Theory: A Sensory Approach to Transcendent Drinks, which grew out of his many (many!) mixology experiments and popular YouTube series, Objective Proof: The Science of Cocktails.

It’s fair to say that Peterson has had an unusual career trajectory. He worked as a line cook and an auto mechanic, and he worked on the production line of a butter factory, among other gigs, before attending culinary school in hopes of becoming a chef. However, he soon realized it wasn’t really what he wanted out of life and went to college, earning an undergraduate degree in physics from Carleton College and a PhD in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan.

After 10 years as an engineer, he switched focus again and became more serious about his side hobby, perfumery. “Not being in kitchens anymore, I thought—this is a way to keep that little flavor part of my brain engaged,” Peterson told Ars. “I was doing problem sets all day. It was my escape to the sensory realm. ‘OK, my brain is melting—I need a completely different thing to do. Let me go smell smells, escape to my little scent desk.'” He and his wife, Jane Larson, founded Sfumato, which led to opening Castalia, and Peterson finally found his true calling.

Peterson spent years conducting mixology experiments to gather empirical data about the interplay between scent and flavor, correct ratios of ingredients, temperature, and dilution for all the classic cocktails—seeking a “Platonic ideal,” for each, if you will. He supplemented this with customer feedback data from the drinks served at Castalia. All that culminated in Cocktail Theory, which delves into the chemistry of scent and taste, introducing readers to flavor profiles, textures, visual presentation, and other factors that contribute to one’s enjoyment (or lack thereof) of a cocktail. And yes, there are practical tips for building your own home bar, as well as recipes for many of Castalia’s signature drinks.

In essence, Peterson’s work adds scientific rigor to what is frequently called the “Mr. Potato Head” theory of cocktails, a phrase coined by the folks at Death & Company, who operate several craft cocktail bars in key cities. “Let’s say you’ve got some classic cocktail, a daiquiri, that has this many parts of rum, this many parts of lime, this many parts of sugar,” said Peterson, who admits to having a Mr. Potato Head doll sitting on Castalia’s back bar in honor of the sobriquet. “You can think about each ingredient in a more general way: instead of rum, this is the spirit; instead of lime, this is the citrus; sugars are sweetener. Now you can start to replace those things with other things in the same categories.”

We caught up with Peterson to learn more.

Ars Technica: How did you start thinking about the interplay between perfumery and cocktail design and the role that aroma plays in each?

Kevin Peterson: The first step was from food over to perfumery, where I think about building a flavor for a soup, for a sauce, for a curry, in a certain way. “Oh, there’s a gap here that needs to be filled in by some herbs, some spice.” It’s almost an intuitive kind of thing. When I was making scents, I had those same ideas: “OK, the shape of this isn’t quite right. I need this to roughen it up or to smooth out this edge.”

Then I did the same thing for cocktails and realized that those two worlds didn’t really talk to each other. You’ve got two groups of people that study all the sensory elements and how to create the most intriguing sensory impression, but they use different language; they use different toolkits. They’re going for almost the same thing, but there was very little overlap between the two. So I made that my niche: What can perfumery teach bartenders? What can the cocktail world teach perfumery?

Ars Technica: In perfumery you talk about a top, a middle, and a base note. There must be an equivalent in cocktail theory?

Kevin Peterson: In perfumery, that is mostly talking about the time element: top notes perceived first, then middle notes, then base notes as you wear it over the course of a few hours. In the cocktail realm, there is that time element as well. You get some impression when you bring the glass to your nose, something when you sip, something in the aftertaste. But there can also be a spatial element. Some things you feel right at the tip of your tongue, some things you feel in different parts of your face and head, whether that’s a literal impression or you just kind of feel it somewhere where there’s not a literal nerve ending. It’s about filling up that space, or not filling it up, depending on what impression you’re going for—building out the full sensory space.

Ars Technica: You also talk about motifs and supportive effects or ornamental flourishes: themes that you can build on in cocktails.

Kevin Peterson: Something I see in the cocktail world occasionally is that people just put a bunch of ingredients together and figure, “This tastes fine.” But what were you going for here? There are 17 things in here, and it just kind of tastes like you were finger painting: “Hey, I made brown.” Brown is nice. But the motifs that I think about—maybe there’s just one particular element that I want to highlight. Say I’ve got this really great jasmine essence. Everything else in the blend is just there to highlight the jasmine.

If you’re dealing with a really nice mezcal or bourbon or some unique herb or spice, that’s going to be the centerpiece. You’re not trying to get overpowered by some smoky scotch, by some other more intense ingredient. The motif could just be a harmonious combination of elements. I think the perfect old-fashioned is where everything is present and nothing’s dominating. It’s not like the bitters or the whiskey totally took over. There’s the bitters, there’s a little bit of sugar, there’s the spirit. Everything’s playing nicely.

Another motif, I call it a jazz note. A Sazerac is almost the same as an old-fashioned, but it’s got a little bit of absinthe in it. You get all the harmony of the old-fashioned, but then you’re like, “Wait, what’s this weird thing pulling me off to the side? Oh, this absinthe note is kind of separate from everything else that’s going on in the drink.” It’s almost like that tension in a musical composition: “Well, these notes sound nice, but then there’s one that’s just weird.” But that’s what makes it interesting, that weird note. For me, formalizing some of those motifs help me make it clearer. Even if I don’t tell that to the guest during the composition stage, I know this is the effect I’m going for. It helps me build more intentionally when I’ve got a motif in mind.

Ars Technica: I tend to think about cocktails more in terms of chemistry, but there are many elements to taste and perception and flavor. You talk about ingredient matching, molecular matching, and impression matching, i.e., how certain elements will overlap in the brain. What role do each of those play?

Kevin Peterson: A lot of those ideas relate to how we pair scents with cocktails. At my perfume company, we make eight fragrances as our main line. Each scent then gets a paired drink on the cocktail menu. For example, this scent has coriander, cardamom, and nutmeg. What does it mean that the drink is paired with that? Does it need to literally have coriander, cardamom, and nutmeg in it? Does it need to have every ingredient? If the scent has 15 things, do I need to hit every note?

chart with sad neutral and happy faces showing the optimal temperature and dilution for a dauquiri

Peterson made over 100 daiquiris to find the “Platonic ideal” of the classic cocktail Credit: Kevin Peterson

The literal matching is the most obvious. “This has cardamom, that has cardamom.” I can see how that pairs. The molecular matching is essentially just one more step removed: Rosemary has alpha-pinene in it, and juniper berries have alpha-pinene in them. So if the scent has rosemary and the cocktail has gin, they’re both sharing that same molecule, so it’s still exciting that same scent receptor. What I’m thinking about is kind of resonant effects. You’re approaching the same receptor or the same neural structure in two different ways, and you’re creating a bigger peak with that.

The most hand-wavy one to me is the impression matching. Rosemary smells cold, and Fernet-Branca tastes cold even when it’s room temperature. If the scent has rosemary, is Fernet now a good match for that? Some of the neuroscience stuff that I’ve read has indicated that these more abstract ideas are represented by the same sort of neural-firing patterns. Initially, I was hesitant; cold and cold, it doesn’t feel as fulfilling to me. But then I did some more reading and realized there’s some science behind it and have been more intrigued by that lately.

Ars Technica: You do come up with some surprising flavor combinations, like a drink that combined blueberry and horseradish, which frankly sounds horrifying. 

Kevin Peterson: It was a hit on the menu. I would often give people a little taste of the blueberry and then a little taste of the horseradish tincture, and they’d say, “Yeah, I don’t like this.” And then I’d serve them the cocktail, and they’d be like, “Oh my gosh, it actually worked. I can’t believe it.”  Part of the beauty is you take a bunch of things that are at least not good and maybe downright terrible on their own, and then you stir them all together and somehow it’s lovely. That’s basically alchemy right there.

Ars Technica: Harmony between scent and the cocktail is one thing, but you also talk about constructive interference to get a surprising, unexpected, and yet still pleasurable result.

Kevin Peterson: The opposite is destructive interference, where there’s just too much going on. When I’m coming up with a drink, sometimes that’ll happen, where I’m adding more, but the flavor impression is going down. It’s sort of a weird non-linearity of flavor, where sometimes two plus two equals four, sometimes it equals three, sometimes it equals 17. I now have intuition about that, having been in this world for a lot of years, but I still get surprised sometimes when I put a couple things together.

Often with my end-of-the-shift drink, I’ll think, “Oh, we got this new bottle in. I’m going to try that in a Negroni variation.” Then I lose track and finish mopping, and then I sip, and I’m like, “What? Oh my gosh, I did not see this coming at all.” That little spark, or whatever combo creates that, will then often be the first step on some new cocktail development journey.

man's torso in a long-sleeved button down white shirt, with a small glass filled with juniper berries in front of him

Pairing scents with cocktails involves experimenting with many different ingredients Credit: EE Berger

Ars Technica: Smoked cocktails are a huge trend right now. What’s the best way to get a consistently good smoky element?

Kevin Peterson: Smoke is tricky to make repeatable. How many parts per million of smoke are you getting in the cocktail? You could standardize the amount of time that it’s in the box [filled with smoke]. Or you could always burn, say, exactly three grams of hickory or whatever. One thing that I found, because I was writing the book while still running the bar: People have a lot of expectations around how the drink is going to be served. Big ice cubes are not ideal for serving drinks, but people want a big ice cube in their old-fashioned. So we’re still using big ice cubes. There might be a Platonic ideal in terms of temperature, dilution, etc., but maybe it’s not the ideal in terms of visuals or tactile feel, and that is a part of the experience.

With the smoker, you open the doors, smoke billows out, your drink emerges from the smoke, and people say, “Wow, this is great.” So whether you get 100 PPM one time and 220 PPM the next, maybe that gets outweighed by the awesomeness of the presentation. If I’m trying to be very dialed in about it, I’ll either use a commercial smoky spirit—Laphroaig scotch, a smoky mezcal—where I decide that a quarter ounce is the amount of smokiness that I want in the drink. I can just pour the smoke instead of having to burn and time it.

Or I might even make my own smoke: light something on fire and then hold it under a bottle, tip it back up, put some vodka or something in there, shake it up. Now I’ve got smoke particles in my vodka. Maybe I can say, “OK, it’s always going to be one milliliter,” but then you miss out on the presentation—the showmanship, the human interaction, the garnish. I rarely garnish my own drinks, but I rarely send a drink out to a guest ungarnished, even if it’s just a simple orange peel.

Ars Technica: There’s always going to be an element of subjectivity, particularly when it comes to our sensory perceptions. Sometimes you run into a person who just can’t appreciate a certain note.

Kevin Peterson: That was something I grappled with. On the one hand, we’re all kind of living in our own flavor world. Some people are more sensitive to bitter. Different scent receptors are present in different people. It’s tempting to just say, “Well, everything’s so unique. Maybe we just can’t say anything about it at all.” But that’s not helpful either. Somehow, we keep having delicious food and drink and scents that come our way.

A sample page from Cocktail Theory discussing temperature and dilution

A sample page from Cocktail Theory discussing temperature and dilution. Credit: EE Berger

I’ve been taking a lot of survey data in my bar more recently, and definitely the individuality of preference has shown through in the surveys. But another thing that has shown through is that there are some universal trends. There are certain categories. There’s the spirit-forward, bittersweet drinkers, there’s the bubbly citrus folks, there’s the texture folks who like vodka soda. What is the taste? What is the aroma? It’s very minimal, but it’s a very intense texture. Having some awareness of that is critical when you’re making drinks.

One of the things I was going for in my book was to find, for example, the platonically ideal gin and tonic. What are the ratios? What is the temperature? How much dilution to how much spirit is the perfect amount? But if you don’t like gin and tonics, it doesn’t matter if it’s a platonically ideal gin and tonic. So that’s my next project. It’s not just getting the drink right. How do you match that to the right person? What questions do I have to ask you, or do I have to give you taste tests? How do I draw that information out of the customer to determine the perfect drink for them?

We offer a tasting menu, so our full menu is eight drinks, and you get a mini version of each drink. I started giving people surveys when they would do the tasting menu, asking, “Which drink do you think you like the most? Which drink do you think you like the least?” I would have them rate it. Less than half of people predicted their most liked and least liked, meaning if you were just going to order one drink off the menu, your odds are less than a coin flip that you would get the right drink.

Ars Technica: How does all this tie into your “cocktails as storytelling” philosophy? 

Kevin Peterson: So much of flavor impression is non-verbal. Scent is very hard to describe. You can maybe describe taste, but we only have five-ish words, things like bitter, sour, salty, sweet. There’s not a whole lot to say about that: “Oh, it was perfectly balanced.” So at my bar, when we design menus, we’ll put the drinks together, but then we’ll always give the menu a theme. The last menu that we did was the scientist menu, where every drink was made in honor of some scientist who didn’t get the credit they were due in the time they were alive.

Having that narrative element, I think, helps people remember the drink better. It helps them in the moment to latch onto something that they can more firmly think about. There’s a conceptual element. If I’m just doing chores around the house, I drink a beer, it doesn’t need to have a conceptual element. If I’m going out and spending money and it’s my night and I want this to be a more elevated experience, having that conceptual tie-in is an important part of that.

two martini glasses side by side with a cloudy liquid in them a bright red cherry at the bottom of the glass

My personal favorite drink, Corpse Reviver No. 2, has just a hint of absinthe. Credit: Sean Carroll

Ars Technica: Do you have any simple tips for people who are interested in taking their cocktail game to the next level?

Kevin Peterson:  Old-fashioneds are the most fragile cocktail. You have to get all the ratios exactly right. Everything has to be perfect for an old-fashioned to work. Anecdotally, I’ve gotten a lot of old-fashioneds that were terrible out on the town. In contrast, the Negroni is the most robust drink. You can miss the ratios. It’s got a very wide temperature and dilution window where it’s still totally fine. I kind of thought of them in the same way prior to doing the test. Then I found that this band of acceptability is much bigger for the Negroni. So now I think of old-fashioneds as something that either I make myself or I order when I either trust the bartender or I’m testing someone who wants to come work for me.

My other general piece of advice: It can be a very daunting world to try to get into. You may say, “Oh, there’s all these classics that I’m going to have to memorize, and I’ve got to buy all these weird bottles.” My advice is to pick a drink you like and take baby steps away from that drink. Say you like Negronis. That’s three bottles: vermouth, Campari, and gin. Start with that. When you finish that bottle of gin, buy a different type of gin. When you finish the Campari, try a different bittersweet liqueur. See if that’s going to work. You don’t have to drop hundreds of dollars, thousands of dollars, to build out a back bar. You can do it with baby steps.

Photo of Jennifer Ouellette

Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban.

A guide to the “platonic ideal” of a Negroni and other handy tips Read More »

oneplus-releases-watch-3-with-inflated-$500-price-tag,-won’t-say-why

OnePlus releases Watch 3 with inflated $500 price tag, won’t say why

watch 3 pricing

Credit: OnePlus

The tariff fees are typically paid on a product’s declared value rather than the retail cost. So a $170 price bump could be close to what the company’s US arm will pay to import the Watch 3 in the midst of a trade war. Many technology firms have attempted to stockpile products in the US ahead of tariffs, but it’s possible OnePlus simply couldn’t do that because it had to fix its typo.

Losing its greatest advantage?

Like past OnePlus wearables, the Watch 3 is a chunky, high-power device with a stainless steel case. It sports a massive 1.5-inch OLED screen, the latest Snapdragon W5 wearable processor, 32GB of storage, and 2GB of RAM. It runs Google’s Wear OS for smart features, but it also has a dialed-back power-saving mode that runs separate RTOS software. This robust hardware adds to the manufacturing cost, which also means higher tariffs now. As it currently stands, the Watch 3 is just too expensive given the competition.

OnePlus has managed to piece together a growing ecosystem of devices, including phones, tablets, earbuds, and, yes, smartwatches. With a combination of competitive prices and high-end specs, it successfully established a foothold in the US market, something few Chinese OEMs have accomplished.

The implications go beyond wearables. OnePlus also swings for the fences with its phone hardware, using the best Arm chips and expensive, high-end OLED panels. OnePlus tends to price its phones lower than similar Samsung and Google hardware, so it doesn’t make as much on each phone. If the tariffs stick, that strategy could be unviable.

OnePlus releases Watch 3 with inflated $500 price tag, won’t say why Read More »

amazon’s-chinese-sellers-to-raise-prices-or-quit-us-market-as-tariffs-hit-145%

Amazon’s Chinese sellers to raise prices or quit US market as tariffs hit 145%

Jassy said Amazon is “doing everything we can to try and keep prices the way they’ve been for customers, as low as possible.” Amazon has already “done some strategic forward inventory buys to get as many items as make sense for customers at lower prices,” and may renegotiate some deals, he said.

Seller: “You can’t rely on the US market”

Reuters spoke to five Chinese sellers, writing that “three said they would look to raise prices for their exports to the US, while two planned to leave the market entirely.”

Dave Fong sells products “from schoolbags to Bluetooth speakers” and has already raised prices in the US by up to 30 percent, the article said. “For us and anyone else, you can’t rely on the US market, that’s quite clear,” Fong told Reuters. “We have to reduce investment, and put more resources into regions like Europe, Canada, Mexico, and the rest of the world.”

Products already shipped to Amazon fulfillment centers in the US soften the blow temporarily, but Shenzhen-based seller Brian Miller “anticipated he and other sellers would need to raise prices steeply when current inventories run out in one or two months.”

“Building blocks for children that sell on Amazon for $20 that cost his company $3 to produce would now cost $7 including the tariff. Maintaining margins would require raising the price by at least 20 percent, and prices for higher-cost toys might see 50 percent increases, he said,” according to Reuters. Miller said that if the tariffs aren’t changed, “manufacturing that serves the US will have to be transferred to other countries like Vietnam or Mexico.”

Bloomberg reported yesterday that Amazon “canceled orders for multiple products made in China and other Asian countries.”

Amazon’s Chinese sellers to raise prices or quit US market as tariffs hit 145% Read More »

trump-administration’s-attack-on-university-research-accelerates

Trump administration’s attack on university research accelerates

Shortly after its inauguration, the Trump administration has made no secret that it isn’t especially interested in funding research. Before January’s end, major science agencies had instituted pauses on research funding, and grant funding has not been restored to previous levels since. Many individual grants have been targeted on ideological grounds, and agencies like the National Science Foundation are expected to see significant cuts. Since then, individual universities have been targeted, starting with an ongoing fight with Columbia University over $400 million in research funding.

This week, however, it appears that the targeting of university research has entered overdrive, with multiple announcements of funding freezes targeting several universities. Should these last for any considerable amount of time, they will likely cripple research at the targeted universities.

On Wednesday, Science learned that the National Institutes of Health has frozen all of its research funding to Columbia, despite the university agreeing to steps previously demanded by the administration and the resignation of its acting president. In 2024, Columbia had received nearly $700 million in grants from the NIH, with the money largely going to the university’s prestigious medical and public health schools.

But the attack goes well beyond a single university. On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced a hold on all research funding to Northwestern University (nearly $800 million) and Cornell University ($1 billion). These involved money granted by multiple government agencies, including a significant amount from the Department of Defense in Cornell’s case. Ostensibly, all of these actions were taken because of the university administrators’ approach to protests about the conflict in Gaza, which the administration has characterized as allowing antisemitism.

Trump administration’s attack on university research accelerates Read More »

here-are-the-reasons-spacex-won-nearly-all-recent-military-launch-contracts

Here are the reasons SpaceX won nearly all recent military launch contracts


“I expect that the government will follow all the rules and be fair and follow all the laws.”

President Donald Trump and Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, speak to the press as they stand next to a Tesla vehicle on the South Portico of the White House on March 11, 2025. Credit: Photo by Mandel Ngan/AFP

In the last week, the US Space Force awarded SpaceX a $5.9 billion deal to make Elon Musk’s space company the Pentagon’s leading launch provider, and then it assigned the vast majority of this year’s most lucrative launch contracts to SpaceX.

On top of these actions, the Space Force reassigned the launch of a GPS navigation satellite from United Launch Alliance’s long-delayed Vulcan rocket to fly on SpaceX’s Falcon 9. ULA, a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin, is SpaceX’s chief US rival in the market for military satellite launches.

Given the close relationship between Musk and President Donald Trump, it’s not out of bounds to ask why SpaceX is racking up so many wins. Some plans floated by the Trump administration involving SpaceX in recent months have raised concerns over conflicts of interest.

Tory Bruno, ULA’s president and CEO, doesn’t seem too worried in his public statements. In a roundtable with reporters this week at the annual Space Symposium conference in Colorado, Bruno was asked about Musk’s ties with Trump.

“We have not been impacted by our competitor’s position advising the president, certainly not yet,” Bruno said. “I expect that the government will follow all the rules and be fair and follow all the laws, and so we’re behaving that way.”

It’s a separate concern whether the Pentagon should predominantly rely on a single provider for access to space, be it a launch company like SpaceX led by a billionaire government insider or a provider like ULA that, so far, hasn’t proven its new Vulcan rocket can meet the Space Force’s schedules.

Military officials are unanimous in the answer to that question: “No.” That’s why the Space Force is keen on adding to the Pentagon’s roster of launch providers. In the last 12 months, the Space Force has brought Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, and Stoke Space to join SpaceX and ULA in the mix for national security launches.

Results matter

The reason Bruno can say Musk’s involvement in the Trump administration so far hasn’t affected ULA is simple. SpaceX is cheaper and has a ready-made line of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets available to launch the Pentagon’s satellites. ULA’s Vulcan rocket is now certified to launch military payloads, but it reached this important milestone years behind schedule.

The Pentagon announced Friday that SpaceX, ULA, and Blue Origin—Jeff Bezos’ space company—won contracts worth $13.7 billion to share responsibilities for launching approximately 54 of the military’s most critical space missions from 2027 through 2032. SpaceX received the lion’s share of the missions with an award for 28 launches, while ULA got 19. Blue Origin, a national security launch business newcomer, will fly seven missions.

This comes out to a 60-40 split between SpaceX and ULA, not counting Blue Origin’s seven launches, which the Space Force set aside for a third contractor. It’s a reversal of the 60-40 sharing scheme in the last big military launch competition in 2020, when ULA took the top award over SpaceX. Space Force officials anticipate Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket will be certified for national security missions next year, allowing it to begin winning launch task orders.

Tory Bruno, president and CEO of United Launch Alliance, speaks with reporters at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on May 6, 2024. Credit: Paul Hennessy/Anadolu via Getty Images

Bruno said he wasn’t surprised with the outcome of this year’s launch competition, known as Phase 3 of the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program. “We’re happy to get it,” he said Monday.

“I felt that winning 60 percent the first time was a little bit of an upset,” Bruno said of the 2020 competition with SpaceX. “I believe they expected to win 60 then … Therefore, I believed this time around that they would compete that much harder, and that I was not going to price dive in order to guarantee a win.”

While we know roughly how many launches each company will get from the Space Force, the military hasn’t determined which specific missions will fly with ULA, SpaceX, or Blue Origin. Once per year, the Space Force will convene a “mission assignment board” to divvy up individual task orders.

Simply geography

Officials announced Monday that this year’s assignment board awarded seven missions to SpaceX and two launches to ULA. The list includes six Space Force missions and three for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO).

SpaceX’s seven wins are worth a combined $845.8 million, with an average price of $120.8 million per launch. Three will fly on Falcon 9 rockets, and four will launch on SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy.

  • NROL-97 on a Falcon Heavy from Cape Canaveral
  • USSF-15 (GPS IIIF-3) on a Falcon Heavy from Cape Canaveral
  • USSF-174 on a Falcon Heavy from Cape Canaveral
  • USSF-186 on a Falcon Heavy from Cape Canaveral
  • USSF-234 on a Falcon 9 from Cape Canaveral
  • NROL-96 on a Falcon 9 from Vandenberg
  • NROL-157 on a Falcon 9 from Vandenberg

The Space Force’s two orders to ULA are valued at $427.6 million, averaging $213.8 million per mission. Both missions will launch from Florida, one with a GPS navigation satellite to medium-Earth orbit and another with a next-generation geosynchronous missile warning satellite named NGG-2.

  • USSF-49 (GPS IIIF-2) on a Vulcan from Cape Canaveral
  • USSF-50 (NGG-2) on a Vulcan from Cape Canaveral

So, why did ULA only get 22 percent of this year’s task orders, instead of something closer to 40 percent? It turns out ULA was not eligible for two of these missions because the company’s West Coast launch pad for the Vulcan rocket is still under construction at Vandenberg Space Force Base. The Space Force won’t assign specific West Coast missions to ULA until the launch pad is finished and certified, according to Brig. Gen. Kristin Panzenhagen, chief of the Space Force’s “Assured Access to Space” office.

Vandenberg, a military facility on the Southern California coast, has a wide range of open ocean to the south, perfect for rockets delivering payloads into polar orbits. Rockets flown out of Cape Canaveral typically fly to the east on trajectories useful for launching satellites into the GPS network or into geosynchronous orbit.

“A company can be certified for a subset of missions while it continues to work on meeting the certification criteria for the broader set of missions,” Panzenhagen said. “In this case, ULA was not certified for West Coast launches yet. They’re working on that.”

Because of this rule, SpaceX won task orders for the NROL-96 and NROL-157 missions by default.

The Space Force’s assignment of the USSF-15 mission to SpaceX makes some sense, too. Going forward, the Space Force wants to have Vulcan and Falcon Heavy as options for adding to the GPS network. This will be the first GPS payload to launch on Falcon Heavy, allowing SpaceX engineers to complete a raft of up-front analysis and integration work. Engineers won’t have to repeat this work on future Falcon Heavy flights carrying identical GPS satellites.

From monopoly to niche

A decade ago, ULA was the sole launch provider to deploy the Pentagon’s fleet of surveillance, communication, and navigation satellites. The Air Force certified SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket for national security missions in May 2015, opening the market for competition for the first time since Boeing and Lockheed Martin merged their rocket divisions to create ULA in 2006.

ULA’s monopoly, which Bruno acknowledged, has now eroded into making the company a niche player in the military launch market.

“A monopoly is not healthy,” he said. “We were one for a few years before I came to ULA, and that was because no one else had the capability, and there weren’t that many missions. There weren’t enough to support many providers. There are now, so this is better.”

There are at least a couple of important reasons the Space Force is flying more missions than 10 or 20 years ago.

One is that Pentagon officials believe the United States is now in competition with a near-peer great power, China, with a rapidly growing presence in space. Military leaders say this requires more US hardware in orbit. Another is that the cost of launching something into space is lower than it was when ULA enjoyed its dominant position. SpaceX has led the charge in reducing the cost of accessing space, thanks to its success in pioneering reusable commercial rockets.

Many of the new types of missions the Space Force plans to launch in the next few years will go to low-Earth orbit (LEO), a region of space a few hundred miles above the planet. There, the Space Force plans to deploy hundreds of satellites for a global missile detection, missile tracking, and data relay network. Eventually, the military may place hundreds or more space-based interceptors in LEO as part of the “Golden Dome” missile defense program pushed by the Trump administration.

United Launch Alliance’s second Vulcan rocket underwent a countdown dress rehearsal last year. Credit: United Launch Alliance

Traditionally, the military has operated missile tracking and communications satellites in much higher geosynchronous orbits some 22,000 miles (36,000 kilometers) over the equator. At that altitude, satellites revolve around the Earth at the same speed as the planet’s rotation, allowing a spacecraft to maintain a constant vigil over the same location.

The Space Force still has a few of those kinds of missions to launch, along with mobile, globe-trotting surveillance satellites and eavesdropping signals intelligence spy platforms for the National Reconnaissance Office. Bruno argues ULA’s Vulcan rocket, despite being more expensive, is best suited for these bespoke missions. So far, the Space Force’s awards seem to bear it out.

“Our rocket has a unique niche within this marketplace,” Bruno said. “There really are two kinds of missions from the rocket’s standpoint. There are ones where you drop off in LEO, and there are ones where you drop off in higher orbits. You design your rockets differently for that. It doesn’t mean we can’t drop off in LEO, it doesn’t mean [SpaceX] can’t drop off in a higher energy orbit, but we’re more efficient at those because we designed for that.”

There’s some truth in that argument. The Vulcan rocket’s upper stage, called the Centaur V, burns liquid hydrogen fuel with better fuel efficiency than the kerosene-fueled engine on SpaceX’s upper stage. And SpaceX must use the more expensive Falcon Heavy rocket for the most demanding missions, expending the rocket’s core booster to devote more propellant toward driving the payload into orbit.

SpaceX has launched at a rate nearly 34 times higher than United Launch Alliance since the start of 2023, but ULA has more experience with high-energy missions, featuring more complex maneuvers to place military payloads directly into geosynchronous orbit, and sometimes releasing multiple payloads at different locations in the geosynchronous belt.

This is one of the most challenging mission profiles for any rocket, requiring a high-endurance upper stage, like Vulcan’s Centaur V, capable of cruising through space for eight or more hours.

SpaceX has flown a long-duration version of its upper stage on several missions by adding an extended mission kit. This gives the rocket longer battery life and a custom band of thermal paint to help ensure its kerosene fuel does not freeze in the cold environment of space.

A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket rolls to the launch pad in Florida in June 2024. The rocket’s upper stage sports a strip of gray thermal paint to keep propellants at the proper temperature for a long-duration cruise through space. Credit: SpaceX

On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of SpaceX’s missions target low-Earth orbit, where Falcon 9 rockets deploy Starlink Internet satellites, send crews and cargo to the International Space Station, and regularly launch multi-payload rideshare missions. These launches maximize the Falcon 9’s efficiencies with booster recovery and reuse. SpaceX is proficient and prolific with these missions, launching them every couple of days. Launch, land, repeat.

“They tend to be more efficient at the LEO drop-offs, I’ll be honest about that,” Bruno said. “That means there’s a competitive space in the middle, and then there’s kind of these end cases. So, we’ll keep winning when it’s way over in our space, they will win when it’s way over in theirs, and then in the middle it’s kind of a toss-up for any given mission.”

Recent history seems to support Bruno’s hypothesis. Last year, SpaceX and ULA competed head-to-head for nine specific launch contracts, or task orders, in a different Space Force competition. The launches will place national security satellites into low-Earth orbit, and SpaceX won all nine of them. Since 2020, ULA has won more Space Force task orders than SpaceX for high-energy missions, although the inverse was true in this year’s round of launch orders.

The military’s launch contracting strategy gives the Space Force flexibility to swap payloads between rockets, add more missions, or deviate from the 60-40 share to SpaceX and ULA. This has precedent. Between 2020 and 2024, ULA received 54 percent of military launches, short of the 60 percent anticipated in their original contract. This amounted to ULA winning three fewer task orders, or a lost value of about $350 million, because of delays in development of the Vulcan rocket.

That’s the cost of doing business with the Pentagon. Military officials don’t want their satellites sitting on the ground. The national policy of assured access to space materialized after the Challenger accident in 1986. NASA grounded the Space Shuttle for two-and-a-half years, and the military had no other way to put its largest satellites into orbit, leading the Pentagon to accelerate development of new versions of the Atlas, Delta, and Titan rockets dating back to the 1960s.

Military and intelligence officials were again stung by a spate of failures with the Titan IV in the 1990s, when it was the only heavy-lift launcher in the Pentagon’s inventory. Then, ULA’s Delta IV Heavy rocket was the sole heavy-lifter available to the military for nearly two decades. Today, the Space Force has two heavy-lift options, and may have a third soon with Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket.

This all has the added benefit of bringing down costs, according to Col. Doug Pentecost, deputy director of the Space Force’s Assured Access to Space directorate.

“If you bundle a bunch of missions together, you can get a better price point,” he said. “We awarded $13.7 billion. We thought this was going to cost us 15.5, so we saved $1.7 billion with this competition, showing that we have great industry out there trying to do good stuff for us.”

Photo of Stephen Clark

Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet.

Here are the reasons SpaceX won nearly all recent military launch contracts Read More »

revolt-brews-against-rfk-jr.-as-experts-pen-rally-cries-in-top-medical-journal

Revolt brews against RFK Jr. as experts pen rally cries in top medical journal

“Courage and clarity”

In a more acerbic article, Vanderbilt researchers Jeremy Jacobs and Garrett Booth blasted Kennedy’s appointment of infamous anti-vaccine advocate David Geier to lead a federal study on immunizations and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Geier and his father, Mark Geier, were named in 2010 by Nature magazine to be among the top science deniers. The duo is known for endlessly promoting the exhaustively debunked false claim that vaccines cause autism, which Kennedy also promotes. Mark Geier was stripped of his medical license over accusations he mistreated children with autism, and David Geier, who has no medical background, was fined for practicing medicine without a license.

Jacobs and Booth argued that hiring David Geier compromises the integrity of the scientific process, erodes public trust, and provides a platform for unreliable information. It’s a “dangerous concession to pseudoscience,” they wrote.

“Elevating figures known for spreading unreliable information threatens not only the integrity of individual research efforts but also the broader public confidence in science,” they wrote. “It sends a message that fringe views deserve equal standing with evidence-based consensus.”

The moves from Kennedy highlight escalating threats to science and medicine, the researchers wrote. Like Edwards, they called for researchers and health experts to stand up to defend evidence-based medicine.

“At this critical juncture, public institutions and academic leaders must demonstrate courage and clarity,” they wrote. “If science is to remain a trusted foundation for public health, its stewards must be selected not for their ability to generate controversy, but for their commitment to truth. That requires rejecting the normalization of unreliable information and reaffirming our collective responsibility to safeguard the integrity of public health.”

Revolt brews against RFK Jr. as experts pen rally cries in top medical journal Read More »

the-ars-cargo-e-bike-buying-guide-for-the-bike-curious-(or-serious)

The Ars cargo e-bike buying guide for the bike-curious (or serious)


Fun and functional transportation? See why these bikes are all the rage.

Three different cargo bikes

Credit: Aurich Lawson | John Timmer

Credit: Aurich Lawson | John Timmer

Are you a millennial parent who has made cycling your entire personality but have found it socially unacceptable to abandon your family for six hours on a Saturday? Or are you a bike-curious urban dweller who hasn’t owned a bicycle since middle school? Do you stare at the gridlock on your commute, longing for a bike-based alternative, but curse the errands you need to run on the way home?

I have a solution for you: invest in a cargo bike.

Cargo bikes aren’t for everyone, but they’re great if you enjoy biking and occasionally need to haul more than a bag or basket can carry (including kids and pets). In this guide, we’ll give you some parameters for your search—and provide some good talking points to get a spouse on board.

Bakfiets to the future

As the name suggests, a cargo bike, also known by the Dutch bakfiet, is a bicycle or tricycle designed to haul both people and things. And that loose definition is driving a post-pandemic innovation boom in this curious corner of the cycling world.

My colleagues at Ars have been testing electric cargo bikes for the past few years, and their experiences reflect the state of the market: It’s pretty uneven. There are great, user-centric products being manufactured by brands you may have heard of—and then there are products made as cheaply as possible, using bottom-of-the-barrel parts, to capture customers who are hesitant to drop a car-sized payment on a bike… even if they already own an $8,000 carbon race rocket.

The price range is wide. You can get an acoustic cargo bike for about $2,000, and you start seeing e-bikes at around $2,000 as well, with top-of-the-line bikes going for up to $12,000.

But don’t think of cargo bikes as leisure items. Instead, they can be a legitimate form of transportation that, with the right gear—and an electric drivetrain—can fully integrate into your life. Replacing 80 percent of my in-town car trips with a cargo bike has allowed me to squeeze in a workout while I bring my kid to school and then run errands without worrying about traffic or parking. It means my wife can take our infant daughter somewhere in the car while I take the bigger kid to a park across town.

Additionally, when you buy a car, the purchase is just the start of the costs; you can be stuck with several hundred to several thousand dollars a year in insurance and maintenance. With bikes, even heavy cargo bikes, you’re looking at a yearly check-up on brakes and chain stretch (which should be a $150 bike shop visit if you don’t do it yourself) and a periodic chain lubing (which you should do yourself).

A recent study found that once people use cargo bikes, they like their cars much less.

And, of course, bikes are fun. No matter what, you’re outside with the wind in your face.

Still, like anything else, there are trade-offs to this decision, and a new glut of choices confront consumers as they begin their journey down a potentially pricy rabbit hole. In this article, instead of recommending specific bikes, we’ll tell you what you need to know to make an informed decision based on your personal preferences. In a future article, we’ll look at all the other things you’ll need to get safely from point A to point B. 

Function, form, and evolutionary design

Long dominated by three main domains of design, the diversification of the North American cargo bike has accelerated, partially driven by affordable battery systems, interest from sustainability-minded riders, and government subsidies. In general, these three categories—bakfiets, longtails, and trikes—are still king, but there is far more variation within them. That’s due to the entrance of mainstream US bike brands like Specialized, which have joined homegrown specialists such as Rad Power and Yuba, as well as previously hard-to-find Dutch imports from Riese & Müller, Urban Arrow, and Larry vs Harry.

Within the three traditional cargo bikes, each style has evolved to include focused designs that are more or less suitable for individual tasks. Do you live in an apartment and need to cart your kids and not much else? You probably want a mid-tail of some sort. Do you have a garage and an urge to move your kid and a full wheelset from another bike? A Long John is your friend!

Let’s take a high-level look at the options.

Bakfiets/Long Johns

Image of a front-loading cargo bike with white metal tubes, set against stone pavement and walls.

A front-loader from Urban Arrow, called the Family. Credit: John Timmer

Dutch for “box bike,” a bakfiets, or a front-loader, is the most alien-looking of the styles presented here (at least according to the number of questions I get at coffee shops). There are several iterations of the form, but in general, bakfiets feature a big (26-inch) wheel in the back, a large cargo area ahead of the rider, and a smaller (usually 20-inch) wheel ahead of the box, with steering provided through a rod or cable linkage. Depending on the manufacturer, these bikes can skew closer to people carriers (Riese & Müller, Yuba, Xtracycle) or cargo carriers (Larry vs Harry, Omnium). However, even in the case of a bakfiets that is purpose-built for hauling people, leg and shoulder space becomes scarce as your cargo gets older and you begin playing child-limb Jenga.

We reviewed Urban Arrow’s front-loading Family bike here.

Brands to look out for: 

  • Riese & Müller
  • Urban Arrow
  • Larry vs Harry
  • Yuba
  • Xtracycle

Longtails

Image of a red bicycle with large plastic tubs flanking its rear wheel.

The Trek Fetch+ 2. Credit: John TImmer

If my local preschool drop-off is any indication, long- and mid-tail cargo bikes have taken North America by storm, and for good reason. With a step-through design, smaller wheels, and tight, (relatively) apartment-friendly proportions, long tails are imminently approachable. Built around 20-inch wheels, their center of gravity, and thus the weight of your cargo or pillion, is lower to the ground, making for a more stable ride.

This makes them far less enjoyable to ride than your big-wheeled whip. On the other hand, they’re also more affordable—the priciest models from Tern (the GSD, at $5,000, and the Specialized Haul, at $3,500) top out at half the price of mid-range bakfiets. Proper child restraints attach easily, and one can add boxes and bags for cargo, though they are seen as less versatile than a Long John. On the other hand, it’s far easier to carry an adult or as many children as you feel comfortable shoving on the rear bench than it is to squeeze large kids into the bakfiets.

We’ve reviewed several bikes in this category, including the Trek Fetch+ 2, Integral Electrics Maven, and Cycrown CycWagen.

Brands to look out for:

  • Radwagon
  • Tern
  • Yuba
  • Specialized, Trek

Tricycles

The Christiania Classic. Credit: Christiania Bikes America

And then we have a bit of an outlier. The original delivery bike, trikes can use a front-load or rear-load design, with two wheels always residing under the cargo. In either case, consumer trikes are not well-represented on the street, though brands such as Christiana and Workman have been around for some time.

Why aren’t trikes more popular? According to Kash, the mononymous proprietor of San Francisco’s Warm Planet Bikes, if you’re already a confident cyclist, you’ll likely be put off by the particular handling characteristics of a three-wheeled solution. “While trikes work, [there are] such significant trade-offs that, unless you’re the very small minority of people for whom they absolutely have to have those features specific to trikes, you’re going to try other things,” he told me.

In his experience, riders who find tricycles most useful are usually those who have never learned to ride a bike or those who have balance issues or other disabilities. For these reasons, most of this guide will focus on Long Johns and longtails.

Brands to look out for: 

Which bike style is best for you?

Before you start wading into niche cargo bike content on Reddit and YouTube, it’s useful to work through a decision matrix to narrow down what’s important to you. We’ll get you started below. Once you have a vague direction, the next best step is to find a bike shop that either carries or specializes in cargo bikes so you can take some test rides. All mechanical conveyances have their quirks, and quirky bikes are the rule.

Where do you want your cargo (or kid): Fore or aft?

This is the most important question after “which bike looks coolest to you?” and will drive the rest of the decision tree. Anecdotally, I have found that many parents feel more secure having their progeny in the back. Others like having their load in front of them to ensure it’s staying put, or in the case of a human/animal, to be able to communicate with them. Additionally, front-loaders tend to put cargo closer to the ground, thus lowering their center of gravity. Depending on the bike, this can counteract any wonky feel of the ride.

An abridged Costco run: toilet paper, paper towels, snacks, and gin. Credit: Chris Cona

How many people and how much stuff are you carrying?

As noted above, a front-loader will mostly max out at two slim toddlers (though the conventional wisdom is that they’ll age into wanting to ride their own bikes at that point). On the other hand, a longtail can stack as many kids as you can fit until you hit the maximum gross vehicle weight. However, if you’d like to make Costco runs on your bike, a front loader provides an empty platform (or cube, depending on your setup) to shove diapers, paper goods, and cases of beer; the storage on long tails is generally more structured. In both cases, racks can be added aft and fore (respectively) to increase carrying capacity.

What’s your topography like?

Do you live in a relatively flat area? You can probably get away with an acoustic bike and any sort of cargo area you like. Flat and just going to the beach? This is where trikes shine! Load up the kids and umbrellas and toodle on down to the dunes.

On the other hand, if you live among the hills of the Bay Area or the traffic of a major metropolitan area, the particular handling of a box trike could make your ride feel treacherous when you’re descending or attempting to navigate busy traffic. Similarly, if you’re navigating any sort of elevation and planning on carrying anything more than groceries, you’ll want to spring for the e-bike with sufficient gear range to tackle the hills. More on gear ratios later.

Do you have safe storage?

Do you have a place to put this thing? The largest consumer-oriented front loader on the market (the Riese & Müller Load 75) is almost two and a half meters (about nine feet) long, and unless you live in Amsterdam, it should be stored inside—which means covered garage-like parking. On the other end of the spectrum, Tern’s GSD and HSD are significantly shorter and can be stored vertically with their rear rack used as a stand, allowing them to be brought into tighter spaces (though your mileage may vary on apartment living).

If bike storage is your main concern, bikes like the Omnium Mini Max, Riese & Müller’s Carrie, and the to-be-released Gocyle CXi/CX+ are designed specifically for you. In the event of the unthinkable—theft, vandalism, a catastrophic crash—there are several bike-specific insurance carriers (Sundays, Velosurance, etc.) that are affordable and convenient. If you’re dropping the cash on a bike in this price range, insurance is worth getting.

How much do you love tinkering and doing maintenance?

Some bikes are more baked than others. For instance, the Urban Arrow—the Honda Odyssey of the category—uses a one-piece expanded polypropylene cargo area, proprietary cockpit components, and internally geared hubs. Compare that to Larry vs Harry’s Bullitt, which uses standard bike parts and comes with a cargo area that’s a blank space with some bolt holes. OEM cargo box solutions exist, but the Internet is full of very entertaining box, lighting, and retention bodges.

Similar questions pertain to drivetrain options: If you’re used to maintaining a fleet of bikes, you may want to opt for a traditional chain-driven derailleur setup. Have no desire to learn what’s going on down there? Some belt drives have internally geared hubs that aren’t meant to be user-serviceable. So if you know a bit about bikes or are an inveterate tinkerer, there are brands that will better scratch that itch.

A note about direct-to-consumer brands

As Arsians, research and price shopping are ingrained in our bones like scrimshaw, so you’ll likely quickly become familiar with the lower-priced direct-to-consumer (DTC) e-bike brands that will soon be flooding your Instagram ads. DTC pricing will always be more attractive than you’ll find with brands carried at your local bike shop, but buyers should beware.

In many cases, those companies don’t just skimp on brick and mortar; they often use off-brand components—or, in some cases, outdated standards that can be had for pennies on the dollar. By that, I mean seven-speed drivetrains mated to freewheel hubs that are cheap to source for the manufacturer but could seriously limit parts availability for you or your poor mechanic.

And let’s talk about your mechanic. When buying online, you’ll get a box with a bike in various states of disassembly that you’ll need to put together. If you’re new to bike maintenance and assembly, you might envision the process as a bit of Ikeaology that you can get through with a beer and minimal cursing. But if you take a swing through /r/bikemechanics for a professional perspective, you’ll find that these “economically priced bikes” are riddled with outdated and poor-quality components.

And this race to a bottom-tier price point means those parts are often kluged together, leading to an unnecessarily complicated assembly process—and, down the line, repairs that will be far more of a headache than they should be. Buying a bike from your local bike shop generally means a more reliable (or at least mainstream) machine with after-sales support. You’ll get free tune-ups for a set amount of time and someone who can assist you if something feels weird.

Oh yeah, and there are exploding batteries. Chances are good that if a battery is self-immolating, it’s because it’s (a) wired incorrectly, (b) used in a manner not recommended by the manufacturer, or (c) damaged. If a battery is cheap, it’s less likely that the manufacturer sought UL or EU certification, and it’s more likely that the battery will have some janky cells. Your best bet is to stick to the circuits and brands you’ve heard of.

Credit: Chris Cona

Bikes ain’t nothin’ but nuts and bolts, baby

Let’s move on to the actual mechanics of momentum. Most cargo bike manufacturers have carried over three common standards from commuter and touring bikes: chain drives with cable or electronically shifted derailleurs, belt-driven internally geared hubs (IGH), or belt-driven continuously variable hubs (CVH)—all of which are compatible with electric mid-drive motors. The latter two can be grouped together, as consumers are often given the option of “chain or belt,” depending on the brand of bike.

Chain-driven

If you currently ride and regularly maintain a bike, chain-driven drivetrains are the metal-on-metal, gears-and-lube components with which you’re intimately familiar. Acoustic or electric, most bike manufacturers offer a geared drivetrain in something between nine and 12 speeds.

The oft-stated cons of chains, cogs, and derailleurs for commuters and cargo bikers are that one must maintain them with lubricant, chains get dirty, you get dirty, chains wear out, and derailleurs can bend. On the other hand, parts are cheap, and—assuming you’re not doing 100-mile rides on the weekend and you’re keeping an ear out for upsetting sounds—maintaining a bike isn’t a whole lot of work. Plus, if you’re already managing a fleet of conventional bikes, one more to look after won’t kill you.

Belt-driven

Like the alternator on your car or the drivetrain of a fancy motorcycle, bicycles can be propelled by a carbon-reinforced, nylon-tooth belt that travels over metal cogs that run quietly and grease- and maintenance-free. While belts are marginally less efficient at transferring power than chains, a cargo bike is not where you’ll notice the lack of peak wattage. The trade-off for this ease of use is that service can get weird at some point. These belts require a bike to have a split chainstay to install them, and removing the rear wheel to deal with a flat can be cumbersome. As such, belts are great for people who aren’t keen on keeping up with day-to-day maintenance and would prefer a periodic pop-in to a shop for upkeep.

IGH vs. CVH

Internally geared hubs, like those produced by Rohloff, Shimano, and Sturmey Archer, are hilariously neat things to be riding around on a bicycle. Each brand’s implementation is a bit different, but in general, these hubs use two to 14 planetary gears housed within the hub of the rear wheel. Capable of withstanding high-torque applications, these hubs can offer a total overall gear range of 526 percent.

If you’ve ridden a heavy municipal bike share bike in a major US city, chances are good you’ve experienced an internally geared hub. Similar in packaging to an IGH but different in execution, continuously variable hubs function like the transmission in a midrange automobile.

These hubs are “stepless shifting”—you turn the shifter, and power input into the right (drive) side of the hub transfers through a series of balls that allow for infinite gear ratios throughout their range. However, that range is limited to about 380 percent for Enviolo, which is more limited than IGH or even some chain-driven systems. They’re more tolerant of shifting under load, though, and like planetary gears, they can be shifted while stationary (think pre-shifting before taking off at a traffic light).

Neither hub is meant to be user serviceable, so service intervals are lengthy.

Electric bikes

Credit: Chris Cona

Perhaps the single most important innovation that allowed cargo bikes to hit mainstream American last-mile transportation is the addition of an electric drive system. These have been around for a while, but they mostly involved hacking together a bunch of dodgy parts from AliExpress. These days, reputable brands such as Bosch and Shimano have brought their UL- and CE-rated electric drivetrains to mainstream cargo bikes, allowing normal people to jump on a bike and get their kids up a hill.

Before someone complains that “e-bikes aren’t bikes,” it’s important to note that we’re advocating for Class 1 or 3 pedal-assist bikes in this guide. Beyond allowing us to haul stuff, these bikes create greater equity for those of us who love bikes but may need a bit of a hand while riding.

For reference, here’s what those classes mean:

  • Class 1: Pedal-assist, no throttle, limited to 20 mph/32 kmh assisted top speed
  • Class 2: Pedal-assist, throttle activated, limited to 20 mph/32 kmh assisted top speed
  • Class 3: Pedal-assist, no throttle, limited to 28 mph/45 kmh assisted top speed, mandatory speedometer

Let’s return to Kash from his perch on Market Street in San Francisco:

The e-bike allows [enthusiasts] to keep cycling, and I have seen that reflected in the nature of the people who ride by this shop, even just watching the age expand. These aren’t people who bought de facto mopeds—these are people who bought [a pedal-assisted e-bike] because they wanted a bicycle. They didn’t just want to coast; they just need that slight assist so they can continue to do the things they used to do.

And perhaps most importantly, getting more people out of cars and onto bikes creates more advocates for cyclist safety and walkable cities.

But which are the reliable, non-explody standards? We now have many e-bike options, but there are really only two or three you’ll see if you go to a shop: Bosch, Shimano E-Drive, and Specialized (whose motors are designed and built by Brose). Between their Performance and Cargo Line motors, Bosch is by far the most common option of the three. Because bike frames need to be designed for a particular mid-drive unit, it’s rare to get an option of one or another, other than choosing the Performance trim level.

For instance, Urban Arrow offers the choice of Bosch’s Cargo Line (85 nm output) or Performance Line (65 nm), while Larry vs Harry’s eBullitt is equipped with Shimano EP6 or EP8 (both at 85 nm) drives. So in general, if you’re dead set on a particular bike, you’ll be living with the OEM-specced system.

In most cases, you’ll find that OEM offerings stick to pedal-assist mid-drive units—that is, a pedal-assist motor installed where a traditional bottom bracket would be. While hub-based motors push or pull you along by making the cranks easier to turn (while making you feel a bit like you’re on a scooter), mid-drives utilize the mechanical advantage of your bike’s existing gearing to make it easier to pedal and give you more torque options. This is additionally pleasant if you actually like riding bikes. Now you get to ride a bike while knowing you can take on pretty much any topography that comes your way.

Now go ride

That’s all you need to know before walking into a store or trolling the secondary market. Every rider is different, and each brand and design has its own quirks, so it’s important to get out there and ride as many different bikes as you can to get a feel for them for yourself. And if this is your first foray into the wild world of bikes, join us in the next installment of this guide, where we’ll be enumerating all the fun stuff you should buy (or avoid) along with your new whip.

Transportation is a necessity, but bikes are fun. We may as well combine the two to make getting to work and school less of a chore. Enjoy your new, potentially expensive, deeply researchable hobby!

The Ars cargo e-bike buying guide for the bike-curious (or serious) Read More »