Honda is recalling more than 325,000 vehicles over faulty rearview image displays, which could increase the risk of a crash, according to federal regulators.

The recall affects 2018-2020 Odyssey vehicles, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced on Wednesday.

A total of 325,588 vehicles are covered by the recall effort.

HONDA RECALLS MORE THAN 880,000 VEHICLES OVER REAR SUSPENSION FAILURE RISK

Honda is recalling more than 325,000 vehicles over faulty rearview image displays. (Honda / Fox News)

The NHTSA said the recall was issued due to rearview cameras that may not display properly.

“Water may enter into the rearview camera, which can cause the rearview camera image to fail to display when the vehicle is in reverse,” the recall notice reads.

A display malfunction could increase the risk of a crash, the NHTSA said.

The recall affects 2018-2020 Odyssey vehicles. (Scott Olson/Getty Images / Getty Images)

The announcement expands a previous recall, which affected certain 2019-2020 Honda Odyssey vehicles.

Owners affected by the recall may take their cars to Honda dealers, so the rearview camera can be replaced free of charge, according to the NHTSA.

Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on Aug. 24.

HONDA RECALLS 99,000 VEHICLES OVER FLAW THAT COULD TRIGGER UNINTENDED AIRBAG DEPLOYMENT

A total of 325,588 vehicles are covered by the recall effort. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images / Getty Images)

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

This comes after Honda issued two separate recalls in recent months that included other car models.

This included more than 880,000 vehicles being recalled because a key rear suspension part can rust and fail, and nearly 99,000 cars that were recalled over a defect that could cause airbags to deploy unexpectedly during a crash.

Jean Bennett and Albert Maguire are married. They are also the reason several hundred people who were going blind have retained their sight.

Their lab at the University of Pennsylvania spent the better part of the 1990s working out the technical details of a gene therapy for Leber congenital amaurosis — a genetic disease that strips away retinal function in childhood, usually ending in total blindness before adulthood. They tried it first in dogs. A group of Swedish Briard puppies, born with the same genetic defect, had their sight restored. Bennett and Maguire adopted them.

In 2007, Maguire administered the first injection into a human patient — a 26-year-old woman at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. A decade later, in December 2017, the FDA approved Luxturna: the first gene replacement therapy for an inherited disease in US history. At the April 2026 Breakthrough Prize ceremony in Los Angeles, Bennett, Maguire, and their longtime collaborator Katherine High shared the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences for that work. Some of the patients who received Luxturna have since qualified for driver’s licenses.

What the Disease Does, and What the Therapy Fixes

Leber congenital amaurosis is caused by a mutation in the RPE65 gene, which produces a protein the retina needs to complete its visual cycle — the process by which light hitting the eye becomes an electrical signal sent to the brain. Without functional RPE65, that cycle breaks. The retina can still receive light but cannot convert it into anything the brain can read. Patients lose light sensitivity progressively, typically experiencing severe vision loss before 18 and total blindness shortly after.

The therapy developed by Bennett, High, and Maguire uses a modified adeno-associated virus — a delivery vehicle that can carry genetic material without triggering immune rejection — to insert a working copy of the RPE65 gene directly into retinal cells via subretinal injection. One treatment per eye, administered days apart. The corrected cells begin producing the protein, the visual cycle resumes, and patients who could previously see only in very bright light start perceiving details they had never been able to make out.

Patients in early clinical trials described seeing snow for the first time. One described seeing the moon. Another saw stars. The disease affects an estimated 1,000 to 3,000 people in the United States — a population small enough that commercial development alone would never have funded the three decades of research required to reach them. Katherine High, who served as the founding director of the Raymond G. Perelman Center for Cellular and Molecular Therapeutics at CHOP and is now CEO of RhyGaze, a gene therapy company based in Philadelphia and Switzerland, helped bridge the gap between academic science and the regulatory pathway that eventually made Luxturna approvable. Bennett, 71, and Maguire, 66, remain emeritus professors at Penn. The therapy they built together has been approved not just by the FDA but by regulators in Europe, where Novartis licensed it for distribution outside the US.

Why Forty Years Is the Point

Bennett joined Penn’s faculty in 1992. The first human clinical trial ran in 2007. FDA approval came in 2017. The prize arrived in 2026. That timeline — three-plus decades from academic lab to pharmacy — accurately describes how foundational biomedical research moves when it is not being chased by a commercial deadline.

This is the argument Yuri Milner has made consistently in designing the Breakthrough Prize. Most private funding in science rewards proximity to an application. Grants chase outcomes. Venture capital chases returns on timescales measured in years, not decades. The researchers who spend thirty years on a disease affecting fewer than 3,000 Americans are working outside the incentive structures that normally sustain scientific careers. They are building a cathedral, in Milner’s phrase from the 2026 prize announcement — “on foundations laid down by the giants who came before them..”

The Prize was designed to recognize exactly that kind of researcher: contributors whose work is foundational rather than immediately monetizable, operating on timescales that most institutional funding structures struggle to sustain. Milner’s own training as a theoretical physicist shaped the conviction directly. He spent years in a discipline where the gap between discovery and application is routinely measured in generations — where the mathematics developed in one century becomes the engineering of the next.

What the Prize adds to recognition is visibility. A $3 million award, handed out on a Hollywood stage in front of an audience that includes the CEOs of Nvidia and OpenAI alongside film and music performers, reaches a different public than a journal publication or a tenure committee commendation. That visibility matters because public understanding of what science produces determines, over time, what science gets funded.

The 2026 Life Sciences Class, Taken Together

Bennett, High, and Maguire shared the ceremony with two other Life Sciences prizes that, read alongside theirs, trace a consistent pattern in how Milner and the Breakthrough Prize Foundation think about which research deserves recognition.

Stuart Orkin and Swee Lay Thein received a prize for decades of work that eventually led to gene-editing treatments for sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia — two inherited blood disorders that together affect millions of people globally, with the heaviest burden falling on populations in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and the Mediterranean. Thein identified a genetic region linked to elevated fetal hemoglobin production in adults, a trait that naturally softens the severity of both conditions. Orkin identified BCL11A, the specific gene that suppresses fetal hemoglobin after birth. Their combined findings gave researchers a precise molecular target: silence BCL11A, allow protective fetal hemoglobin to persist, and the disease becomes dramatically more manageable. Gene-editing therapies built on exactly that logic have since reached patients and received regulatory approval.

Rosa Rademakers and Bryan Traynor were recognized for identifying the C9orf72 gene mutation as the most common known genetic cause of both ALS and frontotemporal dementia — two conditions that had long resisted genetic explanation and had largely been treated as separate diseases. The discovery that a single mutation could drive both redirected an entire research field toward a testable, actionable target. Clinical trials targeting C9orf72 are now running.

Each of the three prizes honored research that required patience measured in decades, produced results that could not have been commercially predicted at the outset, and has since moved from academic publication toward patients who had no other options.

What the Eureka Manifesto Said About Biology

In his Eureka Manifesto, Milner identified life sciences as one of the deepest mismatches in all of science — research that is profound in its importance to human welfare and chronically underfunded relative to that importance. The book makes the case that directing serious capital toward fundamental biological research is one of the highest-return investments a civilization can make, precisely because the downstream benefits cannot be predicted from the research itself at the time it is being done.

Luxturna illustrates this directly. Bennett’s early work in the 1990s was about understanding how a specific protein interacts with the retina. It was a basic science question about a poorly understood mechanism. It became a therapy because the science pointed there, because the researchers followed it long enough, and because the clinical and regulatory infrastructure existed to translate the findings. The Giving Pledge commitment Milner made alongside his wife Julia in 2012 formalized this philosophy at the level of personal wealth: invest in scientists, not just projects. Trust the researchers building foundations before the applications are visible.

That framing has practical consequences for how the Prize is structured. It does not restrict its recognition to research that has already produced a commercial product. It recognizes the discovery, the mechanism, the molecular target — the work that makes products possible years or decades later. The 2026 Life Sciences class is evidence that this distinction is not semantic. All three prize-winning programs produced fundamental knowledge long before they produced clinical outcomes.

The Cathedral and the Patient

At the 2026 ceremony, Anne Hathaway and Alex Honnold presented a video about Baby KJ — KJ Muldoon, a child born with carbamoyl phosphate synthetase 1 deficiency, a rare metabolic disease in which the liver cannot process ammonia properly. Without treatment, the ammonia buildup becomes toxic to the brain. KJ was only days old when he was diagnosed and spent his first ten months at the hospital. His doctors at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia developed a personalized CRISPR-based gene therapy using base-editing techniques pioneered by previous Breakthrough Prize laureate David Liu — a one-time treatment designed specifically around KJ’s individual mutation. He has since been walking, talking, and meeting developmental milestones that were once uncertain.

The connection between KJ’s treatment and the research honored at the same ceremony runs through the logic of the entire evening. Liu’s base-editing work, recognized by a prior Breakthrough Prize, made KJ’s therapy possible. Bennett, High, and Maguire’s gene therapy work, recognized this year, established the delivery mechanisms and regulatory precedents that personalized gene therapies now build on. The cathedral metaphor Milner used in his statement holds: each laureate’s work is a section of a structure that no single researcher could complete alone, and whose full dimensions no single generation could see.

Milner has described the Prize as a public claim about value — about what a society decides deserves recognition and therefore resources. A researcher who spends forty years on a disease affecting a few thousand people, without a commercial path in sight, is making a bet that the science matters more than the return. The Prize says that bet was right. Baby KJ, walking and talking at a Hollywood ceremony that his existence helped explain, is what it looks like when that bet pays out.

Shares of Eli Lilly and Company fell modestly Wednesday, trading at $1,228.75, down $6.81, or 0.55 percent, pulling back slightly after the pharmaceutical giant closed at a fresh all-time high in the previous session amid a wave of increasingly bullish analyst commentary.

Note: This article is intended to provide factual context and does not constitute financial advice. Readers should consult a licensed financial advisor before making investment decisions.

Eli Lilly shares closed Tuesday at $1,235.56, up 2.96 percent, or $35.50, after touching an intraday high of $1,249.45, extending a rally that has now pushed the company’s market capitalization to approximately $1.16 trillion. According to The Motley Fool, Tuesday’s gains were driven primarily by upbeat analyst commentary, with JPMorgan analyst Chris Schott reiterating his Overweight rating on the stock while raising his price target from $1,300 to $1,400, a forecast that implied more than 13 percent additional upside even after Tuesday’s gains.

JPMorgan’s revised target was one of several price target increases issued for Eli Lilly in recent days. According to CNN, RBC Capital raised its price target on the stock to $1,500 from $1,250, while Morgan Stanley bumped its target modestly to $1,347 from $1,344. Cantor Fitzgerald had earlier raised its own target to $1,350 from $1,230 while maintaining an Overweight rating, and RBC Capital had previously reiterated an Outperform rating with a target of $1,250 before its more recent revision. The wave of upward revisions reflects broadly strengthening Wall Street sentiment toward the company heading into its next earnings report.

Eli Lilly’s continued rally has been underpinned by strong underlying financial performance tied largely to its GLP-1 weight-loss and diabetes drug franchise. According to Yahoo Finance, the company reported $19.8 billion in first-quarter revenue, driven primarily by its blockbuster drugs Mounjaro and Zepbound, and subsequently raised its full-year revenue guidance to a range of $82 billion to $85 billion. According to Investing.com, the company’s trailing revenue growth stands at 47 percent, with a price/earnings-to-growth ratio of 0.33, a figure some analysts view as attractively valued relative to the company’s growth trajectory despite its already elevated share price.

A significant regulatory tailwind has also factored into recent investor optimism. The Medicare GLP-1 Bridge program officially launched July 1, 2026, expanding insurance coverage for GLP-1 medications and capping patient out-of-pocket costs for Zepbound and a related drug at $50 per month for eligible Medicare beneficiaries. According to TradingKey, the program’s launch has helped ease investor concerns about broader drug-pricing pressure by demonstrating that expanded insurance access can significantly widen the pool of patients able to afford the company’s flagship treatments, offsetting some of the downward pressure on net realized drug prices that Eli Lilly has faced in recent quarters.

Despite the largely positive tone surrounding the stock, some analysts have flagged risks worth monitoring. TradingKey’s analysis noted that Eli Lilly continues to experience systemic declines in net realized drug prices, a trend expected to weigh on top-line revenue growth in the low-to-mid teens percentage range going forward, with that pricing pressure expected to intensify following the Medicare Bridge program’s rollout. The analysis also pointed to regulatory friction tied to the company’s policy restricting safety-net hospital access to the federal 340B drug discount program and its request for proprietary insurance claims data, a stance that has drawn pushback from healthcare trade associations and could expose the company to federal dispute-resolution actions, administrative penalties or litigation. Additionally, the analysis flagged heightened regulatory scrutiny tied to an FDA request for additional safety data regarding potential liver injury risk associated with one of the company’s products.

Eli Lilly has also continued advancing its broader drug pipeline and regulatory approvals in recent weeks. The company’s cancer treatment Jaypirca received a positive opinion from the European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use for treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia, with formal European Union approval expected within roughly two months. Separately, Health Canada approved Eli Lilly’s Mounjaro for use in children as young as 10 years old, expanding the drug’s approved patient population in that market. The company also entered into a distribution and promotion agreement with Swiss market-expansion firm DKSH Holding for operations in Hong Kong and Macau, and separately reached a distribution agreement with Innovent Biologics for its drug Verzenios in certain markets.

Not all recent news has been favorable for Eli Lilly. According to CNN, the company’s stock retreated in late June amid emerging concerns tied to China-related developments, and generic drugmaker Sandoz has submitted applications to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration seeking approval for generic versions of tirzepatide, the active ingredient in both Mounjaro and Zepbound, a development that could eventually introduce lower-cost competition to Eli Lilly’s core weight-loss and diabetes franchise. According to Investing.com, Eli Lilly’s U.S. patent protection for tirzepatide is set to expire in 2036, providing the company with a substantial runway before generic competition could meaningfully affect its market position domestically.

Eli Lilly, headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana, and founded in 1876, is currently ranked as the most valuable pharmaceutical company in the world and the fourth-largest biomedical company by revenue globally, according to Google Finance. The company reached a $1 trillion market capitalization in November 2025, becoming the first health care company in history to achieve that milestone. Eli Lilly’s stock carries a Piotroski Score of 9, according to InvestingPro analysis cited by Investing.com, reflecting strong overall financial health, and the company has raised its dividend for 11 consecutive years, with a current quarterly dividend of $1.73 per share.

Despite the stock’s dramatic year-over-year gain of nearly 59 percent, according to Investing.com, some analysis has suggested the shares may currently be trading above their calculated fair value, even as the company maintains strong underlying fundamentals. With Eli Lilly’s next earnings report still pending and multiple analysts continuing to raise their price targets in anticipation of continued strong results, investors are likely to keep close watch on how the Medicare GLP-1 Bridge program’s early rollout affects patient volumes and pricing dynamics, along with any further developments tied to generic competition and ongoing regulatory scrutiny of the company’s drug-pricing and access policies.

Apple announced Wednesday it is investing more than $30 billion in chip manufacturing in the U.S. 

The investment, in partnership with Broadcom, is set to produce 15 billion chips, creating hundreds of U.S. jobs. Broadcom’s facility in Fort Collins, Colorado, is expanding its capabilities to produce the chips. 

“This is another major win for America and another sign that the Trump administration’s economic agenda is delivering results,” a Trump administration official told Fox News Digital. “Apple has made investing in the United States a clear priority, and we hope other companies will follow its lead. We commend Apple for recognizing this opportunity and taking meaningful steps to strengthen America’s chip supply chain.”   

APPLE UNVEILS HISTORIC $500B INVESTMENT IN US MANUFACTURING, INNOVATION: ‘BULLISH ON THE FUTURE’

Apple announced it will invest more than $30 billion towards chip manufacturing in the U.S. (CFOTO/Future Publishing via Getty Images / Getty Images)

Apple CEO Tim Cook touted its partnership with Broadcom and both companies’ “commitment to American manufacturing and innovation.”

“The cutting-edge components built in Fort Collins are essential to delivering the incredible performance and connectivity our customers expect, and we’re proud to deepen our investments in U.S.-based suppliers that share our commitment to excellence and innovation,” Cook said in a statement. “We’re grateful to the President and his administration for supporting important projects like this.”

APPLE BUILDING AMERICAN-MADE AI SERVERS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE IN NEW HOUSTON FACILITY, ANSWERING TRUMP CALL

Apple CEO Tim Cook thanked President Donald Trump for supporting the company’s latest efforts in chip manufacturing. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images / Getty Images)

“Broadcom is proud to continue to work with Apple after decades of success together, and we share a strong commitment to American innovation,” Broadcom President and CEO Hock Tan stated. “With Apple’s newest commitment, we’re pleased to expand our manufacturing footprint in Fort Collins, where we create groundbreaking technology that connects people around the world.”

Apple announced a whopping $600 billion investment in a four-year period since the beginning of the second Trump administration, including the manufacturing of AI servers at a facility in Houston. 

APPLE TO WORK WITH INTEL ON US CHIP DESIGN AND PRODUCTION, TRUMP SAYS

Apple previously told Fox News Digital in October that it was partnering with local contractors to build the facility, and is working closely with Houston City College to recruit and hire local talent.

A source familiar with the conversations told Fox News Digital that President Donald Trump made a direct appeal to Cook to “go big” on American jobs and reshoring its manufacturing base, and that Cook told the president he would “step up,” which led to a commitment to the $600 billion investment in America. 

A source told Fox News Digital that President Donald Trump made a direct appeal to Apple CEO Tim Cook to boost manufacturing in the U.S. (Win McNamee/Getty Images / Getty Images)

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

The cost of mailing a letter will climb again this summer after federal regulators approved another round of U.S. Postal Service (USPS) price increases, including a 4-cent increase in the price of a Forever stamp.

The Postal Regulatory Commission on Wednesday approved USPS’ proposed mailing services price changes, clearing the way for the new rates to take effect on July 12. 

The price of a First-Class Mail Forever stamp will increase from 78 cents to 82 cents, while mailing service prices overall will rise by about 4.8%, according to the Postal Service.

Other approved price changes include:

• Domestic postcards: 61 cents to 65 cents
• Metered 1-ounce letters: 74 cents to 78 cents
• International postcards: $1.70 to $1.75
• International 1-ounce letters: $1.70 to $1.75

The additional-ounce charge for single-piece letters will remain 29 cents. USPS has said the latest increase is necessary as it continues grappling with rising operating costs and longstanding financial challenges.

AVERAGE NEW CAR PAYMENT REACHES ALL-TIME HIGH AS AFFORDABILITY ISSUES PERSIST

The new rates will take effect on July 12.  (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“In the midst of the severe financial crisis facing the Postal Service and continued rising operational costs, the Postal Service is using all available tools… to ensure we can continue to fulfill our universal service obligation and serve the American public,” USPS said when it proposed the increase in April.

The Postal Service generally receives no taxpayer funding for operating expenses and instead relies on revenue from postage, products and services.

The price of a First-Class Mail Forever stamp will increase from 78 cents to 82 cents. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

While the Postal Regulatory Commission approved the rate changes, it also warned that USPS continues to face significant long-term challenges, including declining mail volume, service performance issues and a deteriorating financial outlook. The commission said it had no legal basis to reject the increase because it complies with current law.

The commission also said USPS used essentially all the pricing authority available for First-Class Mail under current regulations and remains concerned about substantial declines in market-dominant mail volume, ongoing service issues and the Postal Service’s overall financial condition as it reviews whether the current ratemaking system is meeting Congress’ objectives.

The Postal Service generally receives no taxpayer funding for operating expenses. ( Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

Forever stamps purchased before the increase will continue to be valid for mailing a standard one-ounce letter regardless of when they are used.