JB1

Maintaining forecast for the time being but Trump et al at least temporarily 'throwing Ukraine under the bus' could conceivably have ramifications for this question. E.g.: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-27/taiwan-closely-watching-ukraine-as-trump-pivots-official-says

Unclear to me if China would be ready/willing to attack Taiwan within the next six months.

China has recently been running military exercises near Taiwan without advance warning:  https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwan-details-surge-chinese-military-activity-2025-02-27/

Also considered: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/28/world/asia/china-military-drills-pacific.html

Confirming previous forecast for now

Unsure if the following affects research activities for this question, but it seems to (temporarily?) contribute to a more difficult environment for some U.S. medical research activities. Watching for more info.:

(2/8/25:) "NIH cuts billions of dollars in biomedical funding, effective immediately" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/02/08/nih-cuts-billions-dollars-biomedical-funding-effective-immediately/)

1/28/25: Watching this development which currently features much lack of clarity:

"White House budget office orders pause in all federal loans and grants" (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/27/us/politics/white-house-pauses-federal-grants.html?smid=url-share)

 Article excerpt:

"Mr. Vaeth [OMB acting director] signaled that the pause, which is set to go into effect on Tuesday, would continue until at least mid-February, saying that agencies should provide a detailed report on the programs that have been affected by Feb. 10. He added that the pause was needed to ensure federal programs aligned with Mr. Trump’s policy priorities.

“The use of federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism and Green New Deal social engineering policies is a waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve,” Mr. Vaeth said.

It was not immediately clear what programs would fall under those categories..." 

 https://thediplomat.com/2024/12/perfect-storm-the-rising-risk-of-china-us-conflict-over-taiwan/

First forecast

..Comments of others so far have been useful..

Starting off by assuming (hoping) for now that the $46 million DARPA grant "...to a UMD-led consortium to develop a shelfstable, field-deployable whole blood substitute with ErythroMer as its core", is/will be safe from Trump admin. (retroactive?) funding purges. (https://www.science.org/content/article/ultimate-blood-substitute-us-military-betting-46-million)

As noted by others and from reading pertinent articles so far, the question's resolution criteria appears to require significant scientific advancements  -- within a period of only a few years. From reading, a "...product [that] must be designed to replace all major components of whole blood (red blood cells, platelets, and plasma) or provide equivalent functionality", does not seem close to existence at present. 

From the Science article, above, artificially reproducing hemoglobin seems especially daunting (at present): 

"... hemoglobin is a tricky molecule, toxic to tissues and vessels. For one thing, it carries oxygen, which itself is an oxidizing agent and can be destructive in the wrong place..."

Noting however that the following published scientific article concludes: 

"...the future does hold promise as new agents, particularly hemoglobin-based agents, are already in the pipeline and one agent has achieved FDA orphan drug status for the treatment of sickle cell disease." (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7086064/)

Also noting that any FDA approval within the question's time period also "...must be for standard clinical use, not just for emergency use authorization.." (etc.), and also would require an "...approved product [that] must be shelf-stable, meaning it can be stored without refrigeration for an extended period (at least several months)..."

Forecast: Unless I've missed something obvious in my reading, the question's resolution criteria and time frame appear to present daunting challenges.  At this point I can (at least) acknowledge  near-100% "no" forecast arguments, but will not quite "go there" for now. Taking a somewhat optimistic view,: Perhaps the fact that leading scientists in the field received a grant and are undertaking the challenge might indicate that (at least some of them believe that) pertinent issues may not be 100% "impossible" to resolve.

Essentially maintaining forecast for now.

1/13/25 article: "China building new mobile piers that could help possible Taiwan invasion" (https://www.ft.com/content/36a00ba4-6178-4267-9786-3e0b59abe67f)

The article notes that "..analysts believe that an amphibious invasion of Taiwan would be one of the most difficult operations in military history."