A sense of foreboding hangs over the National Institutes of Health
As President Trump takes the reins of the federal government, one of the agencies in turmoil is the National Institutes of Health — the world’s leading public funder of biomedical research.
The new administration imposed a blackout on the NIH and other health agencies on most communications with the outside world and banned travel, forcing the cancellation of meetings needed for decisions about what research to fund next in the fights against cancer, heart disease, diabetes and other diseases.
Those moves, among others, have generated widespread confusion, anxiety and fear among scientists and doctors on the sprawling NIH campus outside Washington, D.C., and at institutions dependent on the agency’s funding.
“It’s a huge deal,” says Haley Chatelaine, a postdoctoral fellow studying basic cellular functions at the NIH who helps bargain for the union representing 5,000 NIH fellows. She was one of just a few NIH employees willing to speak on the record with NPR.
“Science moves at breakneck speeds. And requires that all of us in the scientific community work together,” Chatelaine said. “Any gap that we experience sets us back in terms of being able to conduct the cutting edge biomedical research that Americans need to stay healthy.”
Communications clampdown, but signs of a thaw
The NIH released a statement Monday night saying the communications blackout has started to lift and some meetings and travel are resuming. The NIH has restarted closed sessions of committees subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which includes advisory councils and boards and scientific review groups.
In addition, the NIH has lifted a block on submissions to the Federal Register, official correspondence to public officials and travel “in support of NIH internal business for oversight and/or conduct of science,” according to the statement.
But a hiring freeze at the NIH remains in place, along with a prohibition on starting any new research projects on NIH’s campus, and a pause on recruiting new patients for any clinical studies at the agency.
“It’s incredibly frustrating,” says Marjorie Levinstein, another postdoctoral fellow at NIH with the union. She studies addiction among other things and says she had to put aside a big step in her research. “It’s really harming our ability to make huge medical breakthroughs.”
The NIH spends most of the agency’s nearly $48 billion annual budget on funding tens of thousands of researchers outside the agency at universities, hospitals, medical schools and other institutions.
So far, NIH funding appears to still be flowing, but there is uncertainty and there are conflicting reports about whether grants are being processed and all payments are being made.
Officials at many institutions are worried about what might happen next. “I have … heard that some extramural institutions are making anticipatory holds on spending in case there is another spending freeze or something like it,” says Kevin Wilson, a vice president at the American Society for Cell Biology.
Uncertainty and a sense of foreboding
“It has been the period of most uncertainty in my adult and professional life as a scientist in terms of the continuity of projects,” Daniel Colon-Ramos, a professor of neuroscience at Yale School of Medicine. “Right now in the scientific community the general feeling is one of uncertainty and concern.”
Even the NIH’s biggest fans say the agency is far from perfect. Some changes have been under consideration for a while, such as making the grant-review process more transparent. But many scientists inside and outside the NIH are describing a sense of foreboding for the NIH.
“There’s been a general theme to Mr. Trump’s ascension to the presidency that this new administration is going to be somehow waging war on the health agencies,” says Dr. Harold Varmus, a scientist at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York who ran the NIH for six years in the 90s. “And it’s going to have a tremendously detrimental affect on the health sciences. All these are terrible signs that we need to be confronting vigorously.”
Trump tried to cut the NIH budget last time he was president and wants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime NIH critic, to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the NIH. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford researcher who was critical of the NIH during and after the pandemic, is Trump’s pick to take over as the next NIH director. His confirmation hearing hasn’t been scheduled yet.
“Most scientists are very worried,” agrees Bruce Alberts, a professor emeritus of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of California, San Francisco, who served as the president of the National Academy of Sciences from 1993 to 2005. “They both have a record of ignoring the best science and making statements and opinions that are not based on the best science and more are based on emotion and the misreading of science.”
“I have grave concerns,” says Keith Yamamoto, special adviser to the chancellor for science policy and strategy at the University of California, San Francisco, who chairs the Coalition for Life Sciences, which advocates for U.S. health agencies. “People are dismayed about the chaos and confusion being sown and don’t really know what to do.”
But many observers also say that if the prohibitions are temporary the long-term impact could be modest.
“If this all lasts a few more days or a couple of weeks and then gets lifted with some potential reforms then we can evaluate those reforms on their merit and that’s fine,” says Dr. Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health. “But, boy, at the moment it’s really disruptive and harmful.”
Transcript:
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Federal agencies in turmoil under the Trump administration include the National Institutes of Health. NPR health correspondent Rob Stein is tracking the world’s leading public funder of biomedical research. Rob, good morning.
ROB STEIN, BYLINE: Good morning, Steve.
INSKEEP: OK, so how has the NIH been affected?
STEIN: Well, at the moment, there’s just a lot of confusion, anxiety and, I’d say, fear. The scientists and doctors on the sprawling campus just outside Washington have been under a blackout of most communications like other health agencies. But we do know that a ban had been imposed on travel, forcing cancellation of some important meetings about what to fund next to fight diseases like, you know, cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Most NIH scientists I reached out to are still afraid to speak publicly. One exception is Haley Chatelaine. She’s a young researcher looking at basic cellular functions who helps bargain for the union representing 5,000 NIH fellows.
HALEY CHATELAINE: It’s a huge deal. Science moves at breakneck speeds and requires that all of us in the scientific community work together. Any gap that we experience sets us back in terms of being able to conduct the cutting-edge biomedical research that Americans need to stay healthy.
STEIN: Now, the NIH released a statement last night saying the communications blackout has started to lift a little, and some meetings and travel are resuming. So some things seem to be easing up.
INSKEEP: OK, what things are not easing up?
STEIN: Well, there’s still a hiring freeze, a prohibition on starting any new research projects on the NIH’s campus, and a pause on recruiting new patients for any clinical studies at the NIH. Marjorie Levinstein’s another postdoctoral fellow at NIH with the union. She studies addiction, among other things, and says she had to put aside a big step in her research.
MARJORIE LEVINSTEIN: It’s incredibly frustrating. It’s really harming our ability to make huge medical breakthroughs.
STEIN: Now, the NIH spends most of the agency’s nearly $48 billion annual budget on funding tens of thousands of researchers outside the agency. You know, at universities, hospitals, and medical centers. So far, the NIH funding spigot appears to remain open, but there’s still worries about the future. So some institutions have started tightening their belts.
INSKEEP: As I’m listening, Rob, I’m thinking about the debate over USAID Agency for International Development.
STEIN: Yeah.
INSKEEP: Some people have been outraged and said this is illegal what’s happening. Other people have said, actually, I have a critique of this agency. So how are people responding to the concerns about NIH?
STEIN: You know, Steve, even the NIH’s biggest fans say the agency is far from perfect. You know, some changes have been under consideration for a while, like making, you know, the grant review process better. But the main feeling I’m hearing now is a sense of foreboding.
I talked with Dr. Harold Varmus at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York. He ran the NIH for six years in the 1990s.
HAROLD VARMUS: There’s been a general theme to Mr. Trump’s ascension to the presidency that this new administration is going to be somehow waging war on the health agencies, and it’s going to have a tremendously detrimental effect on health sciences. All of these are terrible signs that we need to be confronting vigorously.
INSKEEP: Rob, I’m just going to note the administration’s leadership for health is not yet in place, although he’s nominated two critics of the NIH.
STEIN: Yeah, that’s absolutely right. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is under consideration to take over the HHS – the Health and Human Services Department – which oversees the NIH. And Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford researcher who was critical of the NIH during the pandemic, is Trump’s pick to take over as the next NIH director. His confirmation hearing hasn’t been scheduled quite yet. So all in all, there’s just a lot of uncertainty and apprehension right now about the future of the NIH.
INSKEEP: That’s NPR’s Rob Stein.
Government Accountability official says fraud does exist, but it’s not widespread
Government accountability officer says fraud is committed by "all walks of life" including "insider threats," but must be proven in court
Deadly storms sweep through the South, leaving at least nine fatalities
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said all of the state's 120 counties were impacted by the storm. "The biggest challenge of this event is it's everywhere."
Congo says Rwanda-backed rebels occupy a 2nd major city in its mineral-rich east
Rwanda-backed rebels reached the center of east Congo's second largest city, Bukavu, on Sunday morning in an unprecedented expansion of their reach in their yearslong fighting.
Protests are set to take place on Presidents Day. Here is why
A series of protests against the Trump administration's actions is planned for Presidents Day.
January 6th … the board game?
Fight for America! is a new art installation about democracy that invites audiences to play a war game — battling over the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Fans in Montreal loudly boo U.S. anthem prior to Americans’ 4 Nations game vs. Canada
It's the second time "The Star-Spangled Banner" drew that reaction in two games the United States has played at the NHL-run international tournament.