NIH scientists speak out over estimated $12 billion in Trump funding cuts
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Gateway Center is seen in the rain in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S., June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Anna Culbertson, a former employee at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, sits for a portrait in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S., June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Jenna Norton, an employee at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, sits for a portrait in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S., June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Ian Morgan, an employee at the National Institute for General Medical Sciences, sits for a portrait in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S., June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases employee Jenna Norton, National Institute for General Medical Sciences employee Ian Morgan and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases former employee Anna Culbertson sit for a portrait in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S., June 8, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Dozens of scientists, researchers and other employees at the U.S. National Institutes of Health issued a rare public rebuke Monday criticizing the Trump administration for major spending cuts that 'harm the health of Americans and people across the globe,' politicize research and 'waste public resources.'
More than 60 current employees sent their letter to NIH director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress who oversee NIH. Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify Tuesday at the U.S. Senate appropriations committee about his agency's budget.
Overall, more than 340 current and recently terminated NIH employees signed the letter, about 250 of them anonymously.
In their letter, NIH staff members said the agency had terminated 2,100 research grants totaling about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since President Donald Trump took office Jan. 20. The contracts often support research, from covering equipment to nursing staff working on clinical trials.
These terminations "throw away years of hard work and millions of dollars" and put patient health at risk, the letter said. NIH clinical trials "are being halted without regard to participant safety, abruptly stopping medications or leaving participants with unmonitored device implants."
Officials at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees NIH, didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
In prior remarks, Bhattacharya has pledged support for Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again agenda, and he has said that means focusing the federal government's "limited resources" directly on combating chronic diseases. At his Senate confirmation hearings in March, Bhattacharya said he would ensure scientists working at NIH and funded by the agency have the necessary resources to meet its mission.
NIH is the world's largest public funder of biomedical research and has long enjoyed bipartisan support from U.S. lawmakers. The Trump administration has proposed cutting $18 billion, or 40%, from NIH's budget next year, which would leave the agency with $27 billion. Nearly 5,000 NIH employees and contractors have been laid off under Kennedy's restructuring of U.S. health agencies, according to NIH staff.
Dr. Jenna Norton, a program director within NIH's division of kidney, urologic and hematologic diseases, was one of 69 current employees who signed the letter as of early Monday. She said speaking out publicly was worth the risk to her career and family.
"I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," Norton said. "There are very real concerns that we're being asked to do likely illegal activities, and certainly unethical activities that breach our rules."
About 20 NIH employees who were recently terminated as probationary workers or "subject to reductions in force" added their names to the letter.
In the letter, Norton and other NIH employees asked Bhattacharya to restore grants that were delayed or terminated for political reasons, where officials ignored peer review to "cater to political whims." They wrote that Bhattacharya had failed to uphold his legal duty to spend congressionally appropriated funds.
One program director at the NIH's National Cancer Institute, who asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation, said she has repeatedly been asked to cancel research grants for no valid reason and in violation of agency rules. She said she fears she could become the target of lawsuits from grantees challenging those decisions.
Dr. Benjamin Feldman, a staff scientist and core director at NIH's Institute of Child Health and Human Development, said he and other researchers want to work with Bhattacharya on reversing the cuts and restoring the NIH as a "beacon for science around the world."
"This is really a hit to the whole enterprise of biomedical research in the United States," Feldman said.
Dr. Ian Morgan, a postdoctoral fellow at the NIH, signed the letter and said he has heard from university researchers about patients losing access to novel cancer treatments in clinical trials due to the uncertainty over NIH funding. He also worries about the long-term effect from gutting NIH's investment in basic science research that can lead to lifesaving treatments years later.
The NIH employees, based in Bethesda, Maryland, named their dissent the "Bethesda Declaration," modeled after Bhattacharya's Great Barrington Declaration in 2020 that called on public health officials to roll back lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic.
"Our hope is that by modeling ourselves after the Great Barrington Declaration that maybe he'll see himself in our dissent," Norton said. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
15 hours ago
- Straits Times
British Parliament votes in favour of assisted dying, paving way for historic law change
Protesters against the legislation held up placards that said 'let's care not kill' and 'kill the Bill not the ill' in London, on June 20. PHOTO: REUTERS British Parliament votes in favour of assisted dying, paving way for historic law change LONDON - Britain's Parliament voted on June 20 in favour of a Bill to legalise assisted dying, paving the way for the country's biggest social change in a generation. In the vote, 314 lawmakers were in favour, while 291 were against the Bill, clearing its biggest parliamentary hurdle. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) law would give mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months or less left to live the right to choose to end their lives with medical help. The vote puts Britain on course to follow Australia, Canada and other countries, as well as some US states, in permitting assisted dying. Supporters say it will provide dignity and compassion to people suffering, but opponents worry that vulnerable people could be coerced into ending their lives. The Bill now proceeds to Britain's upper chamber, the House of Lords, where it will undergo months of scrutiny. While there could be further amendments, the unelected Lords will be reluctant to block legislation that has been passed by elected members of the House of Commons. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government was neutral on the legislation, meaning politicians voted according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Mr Starmer had previously said he was in favour of allowing assisted dying. Opinion polls show that a majority of Britons back assisted dying. June 20's vote followed hours of emotional debate and references to personal stories in the chamber, and followed a vote in November that approved the legislation in principle. The vote took place 10 years after Parliament last voted against allowing assisted dying. Opponents of the Bill had argued that ill people may feel they should end their lives for fear of being a burden to their families and society, and some lawmakers withdrew their support after the initial vote in 2024, saying safeguards had been weakened. The 314 to 291 vote for the Bill compared to November 2024's result, which was 330 to 275 in favour. In the original plan, an assisted death would have required court approval. That has been replaced by a requirement for a judgement by a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist, which is seen by some as a watering down. The Labour lawmaker who proposed the Bill, Mr Kim Leadbeater, said that the legislation still offered some of the most robust protections in the world against the coercion of vulnerable people. Hundreds of campaigners both in favour and against the legislation gathered outside Parliament on June 20 to watch the vote on their mobile phones. Those in favour chanted 'my decision, my choice', holding up posters that said 'my life, my death' and photos of relatives who they said had died in pain. Those against the legislation held up placards that said 'let's care not kill' and 'kill the Bill not the ill'. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
AsiaOne
a day ago
- AsiaOne
Israeli hospital had taken patients underground hours before missile hit, World News
BEERSHEBA, Israel — Shattered glass and piles of rubble littered the floors of Soroka Medical Centre on Thursday (June 19), after an Iranian missile ripped through the hospital in Israel's south, injuring dozens. The major public hospital, which serves around one million people living in southern Israel, sustained extensive damage in the strike. Several wards were completely destroyed, with debris scattered across the parking lot and surrounding walkways. "We knew from the noise that it wasn't like anything we were used to, that it wasn't like anything we had seen before," said Nissim Huri, who was working in the kitchen and took refuge in a concrete shelter during the strike. "It was terrifying," Huri said, describing the scenes as she emerged from the shelter as "complete destruction". Israel launched an aerial war against Iran on Friday, calling it a preemptive strike designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Iran has denied plans to develop such weapons and retaliated by launching counterstrikes on Israel. Hospital staff said the blast was so powerful it threw them backward. On Thursday afternoon, they sat in the hospital courtyard rewatching videos of towering plumes of smoke. Israel's Health Ministry said 71 people were wounded in the attack, most of them suffering light injuries or panic attacks as they rushed for shelter. Hospital staff evacuated patients and cordoned off damaged areas. Iran's Revolutionary Guards said they had targeted Israeli military and intelligence headquarters near the hospital. An Israeli military official denied there were military targets nearby. The hospital began moving patients out of some buildings in recent days as part of emergency precautions in response to the Iranian strikes. It has since limited admissions to life-threatening cases only. Patients in the damaged building were taken to an underground facility just hours before the strike, a statement from the Israeli Health ministry said. Medical transporter Yogev Vizman, called to the scene just after the blast, said he witnessed "total destruction" when he arrived. "That whole building was on fire... everything collapsed, Vizman said. "I'm sad, this is like my home, they simply destroyed our home... I never thought there would be a direct hit on a hospital." Soldiers from the Israeli military's search and rescue unit searched the battered buildings to ensure nobody was trapped inside. An Israeli soldier told Reuters all he saw at first was "thick black smoke" and that they inspected every floor to look for casualties. "It's God's will that this place was evacuated from civilians last night," he said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. [[nid:719283]]
Straits Times
a day ago
- Straits Times
British lawmakers to vote on landmark assisted dying law
FILE PHOTO: Kim Leadbeater reacts during an interview about the Assisted Dying Bill in Westminster, London, Britain, October 15, 2024. REUTERS/Jaimi Joy/File Photo FILE PHOTO: A protestor holds a placard as they gather outside the parliament as British lawmakers debate the assisted dying law, in London, Britain, November 29, 2024. REUTERS/Mina Kim/File Photo LONDON - British lawmakers will vote on Friday on whether to proceed with a bill to legalise assisted dying for terminally ill people, in what would be the biggest social reform in the country for a generation. Last November, lawmakers voted 330 to 275 in favour of the principle of allowing assisted dying, paving the way for Britain to follow Australia, Canada and other countries, as well as some U.S. states. Now, after months of scrutiny, amendment and emotional debate, the bill must clear another stage of voting to keep it on the road to legalisation, a process that could still take months. A vote against would stop it in its tracks. The Labour lawmaker who has proposed the new law, Kim Leadbeater, said there could be a reduction in the number of members of parliament who support the bill on Friday, but she was confident it would still be approved. One member of parliament who supports the legislation said there were about a dozen votes between those in favour and against, with a number yet to declare their position. Dozens of lawmakers earlier in June signed a letter to the leader of the House of Commons saying that there had not been enough time to debate the details of such a consequential law change. Leadbeater said her biggest fear was that if the legislation was voted down, then it could be another decade before the issue returns to parliament. The issue was last considered in 2015 when lawmakers voted against it. "It works and it is safe, and it provides dignity to terminally ill people," she told reporters before the vote. "This is not an either or when it comes to palliative care or assisted dying. It is about choice for people." PUBLIC SUPPORT Opinion polls show that a majority of Britons back assisted dying, and supporters say the law needs to catch up with public opinion. But, since the initial vote, some lawmakers say they are worried the bill's protections against the coercion of vulnerable people have been weakened. Under the proposed law, mentally competent, terminally ill adults in England and Wales with six months or fewer to live would be given the right to end their lives with medical help. In the original plan, an assisted death would have required court approval. That has been replaced by a requirement for a judgement by a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist. Lawmakers have also raised questions about the impact of assisted dying on the finances and resources of Britain's state-run National Health Service and the need to improve palliative care. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government is neutral on the bill, meaning politicians can vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Lawmakers will hold a final debate on the legislation on Friday morning before a likely vote in the afternoon. If it passes, the legislation will be sent to the House of Lords, parliament's upper chamber, for further scrutiny. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
