From the article:
> Researchers from lower risk countries have been told they could lose access beginning in either September or December if at that point they have been at the lab more than 2 years or, under a waiver, 3 years.
> Researchers from lower risk countries have been told they could lose access beginning in either September or December if at that point they have been at the lab more than 2 years or, under a waiver, 3 years.
> Sources at NIST contacted by ScienceInsider say they have yet to see any written versions of the proposed rules, which have been conveyed in meetings.
And:
> Many researchers from these countries—particularly China—have been informed that their lab access will be reviewed by 31 March, and terminated if they have been at NIST for more than 3 years or pose “too high a risk”
So, the high-risk limitation is actual, and affected researchers were already notified by NIST. While no low-risk limitations are mentioned by or attributable to NIST. That part appears to be hearsay and speculation confidently jammed into the headline.
I find that to be misleading. Bob should be ashamed of himself. I hope he can do better. It took me a single paragraph to more clearly reword the article, and I'm not a professional writer.
The word "could" seems to conflict with "It's all foreign guest researchers by end of September."
If you think that's what he meant, then it's clear that Bob has made things incredibly ambiguous since we disagree. Do you think he might have written the article, and especially the headline, in such a way as to make it more clickable?
I do.