‘A disaster for all of us': US scientists describe impact of Trump cuts
Donald Trump's assault on science – but particularly climate science – has led to unprecedented funding cuts and staff layoffs across federally funded agencies and programs, threatening to derail research tackling the most pressing issues facing Americans and humanity more broadly. A generation of scientific talent is also on the brink of being lost, with unprecedented political interference at what were previously evidence-driven agencies jeopardizing the future of US industries and economic growth.
Johnson was among scores of scientists conducting vital research across a range of fields from infectious diseases, robotics, education, computer science and the climate crisis, who responded to a Guardian online callout to share their experiences about the impact of the Trump administration's cuts to science funding.
Many said they had already had funding slashed or programs terminated, while others fear that cuts are inevitable and are beginning to search for alternative work – either overseas or outside science. So far, the cuts have led to a 60% reduction in Johnson's team, and fear is mounting over the future of 30 years of climate data and expertise as communities across the country are battered by increasingly destructive extreme weather events.
'We won't be able to afford to continue providing the free and quality tools and services to make our data stores searchable, viewable, usable, and accessible. We might not even be able to afford to keep all the data … this will mean worse forecasts and less effective search and rescue responses leading to unnecessary and avoidable loss of life,' said Johnson (not her real name).
Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act (Obbba) calls for a 56% cut to the current $9bn National Science Foundation (NSF) budget, as well as a 73% reduction in staff and fellowships – with graduate students among the hardest hit.
The NSF is the premier federal investor in basic science and engineering, and more than 1,650 grants have also been terminated, according to Grant Watch, a non-profit tracking federally funded research grants under the Trump administration. At the behest of Trump, the hardest hit are studies aimed at addressing the unequal impact of the climate crisis and other environmental hazards, as well as any projects perceived to have a connection to diversity, equity or inclusion (DEI).
An anthropologist who researches the impact of floods and cyclones on public health and food supplies in Madagascar, which is among the most vulnerable nations in the world to the climate crisis but contributed virtually nothing to the catastrophe, is leaving Johns Hopkins for Oxford University after funding for the remainder of her fellowship was threatened.
'I am devastated to leave family, friends and the grad students I am mentoring in the US, but this seemed like the only way to continue work I've been pursuing for 10+ years. I am working on improving climate mitigation and adaptation in an African country. After Trump was elected, the writing was on the wall. There is no way I can write grant applications that will be acceptable to this government.'
A veteran infectious diseases researcher at Ohio State University was forced to abandon a clinical trial for a new medication to treat hypoxemic respiratory failure in Covid patients after the National Institute of Health (NIH) terminated funding midway through the study.
The decision will save $500,000, but $1.5m had already been spent on the trial which researchers hoped would lead to new treatment options for the million or so people hospitalized with respiratory failure each year as a result of flu, Covid and other infections. The trial would have to be repeated from the start, in order to seek approval from the FDA.
'This is a disaster for all of us. We're all depressed and living on a knife-edge, because we know we could lose the rest of our grants any day. These people really hate us yet all we've done is work hard to make people's health better. A flu pandemic is coming for us, what's happening in cattle is truly scary and all we have is oxygen and hope for people,' said the Ohio scientist.
Between 90 and 95% of their lab work is funded through the NIH. So far, more than 3,500 grants have been terminated or frozen by the NIH. Trump's budget proposes slashing NIH funding by more than 40%.
The majority of scientists who got in touch described feeling anxious and despondent – about their own work if the cuts continue, but also about what seems an inevitable loss of talent and knowledge which could upend the US position as a global leader in scientific endeavors and ricochet for years to come.
The brain drain is real. The Australian Academy of Science is leading the country's efforts to proactively recruit top US-based scientists, creating a new global talent program that includes research funding, access to Australian research infrastructure, fast-track visas and a relocation package. At least 75 scientists applied in the first three months of the program, the AAS told the Guardian.
The Trump administration has accused universities, without evidence, of promoting leftwing radical thinking and research, but federal funds train scientists who go on to work for the oil and gas, mining, chemical, big tech and other industries.
Several respondents said the private sector was also starting to feel the knock-on effect of Trump's cuts and tariffs. Wessel van den Bergh, a materials scientist with a PhD, was working on battery storage technology for a Chinese-owned renewable energy company in Massachusetts. He was laid off in early June amid Trump's tariff chaos and attacks on science and renewables, and is struggling to find work.
'When I started my PhD program, America was at the leading edge of batteries/energy storage but this is no longer true due to tariffs, funding cuts, and aggression towards green alternatives. Rather, the US has ceded its hard-earned expertise to other countries such as Korea, Japan and China,' Van den Bergh said.
Trump supports the expansion of fossil fuels and has received millions of dollars in campaign donations from the oil, gas and coal industry, while his budget legislation terminated incentives for solar and wind energy.
'It's crushing, I don't see a clear path ahead any more. I no longer feel this country values science. It's genuinely heartbreaking to build your vocation to something that could genuinely benefit the world for it to be quashed for imagined political victories … especially at a time where these kinds of technologies are the only way out of the climate crisis,' said Van den Bergh.
Separately, the Nuclear Physics Laboratory (NPL) at the University of Illinois got in touch after the Guardian's recent investigation into the chaos at the NSF. For almost 100 years the NPL has been at the forefront of cutting-edge science in drug discovery, cancer treatments, PET scans and other medical diagnoses, and semiconductor testing, with researchers playing a key role in world-renowned institutions like Cern and Los Alamos. It's a major hub for nurturing and training future talent, and at least 50 students have graduated with PhDs in the past 20 years.
It was here that Rosalind Yalow got her PhD in nuclear physics in 1945, and then went on to invent radioimmunoassay – a technique to detect minute amounts of hormones, viruses and drugs in the blood which revolutionized medical testing for conditions such as diabetes. Yalow was awarded the Nobel prize in 1977, only the second woman to win it.
The lab was recently informed that the NSF will reduce funding that supports graduates students from $15m for four years to $1m for one year.
'Our group in nuclear physics at Illinois actually predates the founding of the NSF in 1950, and we have a long history of both producing scientists and accelerator technologies that have had an impact on huge numbers of people,' said Anne M Sickles, professor of nuclear physics.
'If you cut the funding to the people who are doing the work right now, you don't know what they would have innovated in 10 years or 15 years or 32 years like Rosalind Yalow. We don't know what we're losing.'
The NFS declined to comment, while the office of management and budget and NIH did not respond.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Bees have some ways to cope with a warming Earth, but researchers fear for their future
Sweat covers Isaac Barnes's face under his beekeeper's veil as he hauls boxes of honeycomb from his hives to his truck. It's a workout in what feels like a sauna as the late-morning June temperatures rise. Though Barnes was hot, his bees were even hotter. Their body temperatures can be up to 27 degrees Fahrenheit (about 15 Celsius) higher than the air around them. As global temperatures rise under climate change, scientists are trying to better understand the effects on managed and wild bees as they pollinate crops, gather nectar, make honey and reproduce. They noticed flying bees gathering nectar avoided overheating on the hottest days by using fewer but harder wingbeats to keep their body temperature below dangerous levels, according to a study published last year. Scientists also say that bees — like people — may also cope by retreating to a cooler environment such as the shade or their nest. 'Just like we go into the shade, or we sweat or we might work less hard, bees actually do the exact same thing so they can avoid the heat,' said Jon Harrison, an environmental physiologist at Arizona State University and one of the study's authors. But that means the bees aren't able to do what they normally do, said Kevin McCluney, a biology professor at Bowling Green State University. 'They're not going out and getting more nectar. They're not mating. They're not doing the things that bees would otherwise do,' McCluney said. Heat is just one challenge for critical pollinator Generally, most bees are heat-tolerant, but as the climate warms, some experts think their ability to fend off disease and gather food might become harder. And habitat loss, increased use of pesticides, diseases and lack of forage for both managed and wild bees are all listed as potential contributors to the global decline of bees and other pollinators. 'If you're not well-fed, and your body is intoxicated with pesticides and you have lots of diseases in your body, you're going to be less heat-tolerant than if you were healthy,' said Margarita López-Uribe, a pollinator health expert at Pennsylvania State University. Earlier this year, preliminary results from the annual U.S. Beekeeping Survey found that beekeepers lost almost 56% of their managed colonies, the highest loss since the survey started in 2010. Almost all of the managed honeybee colonies in the U.S. are used to pollinate agricultural crops such as almonds, apples, cherries and blueberries. Fewer pollinators can lead to less pollination and potentially lower yields. 'It's a very fragile system if you think about it,' López-Uribe said. 'Because if something goes wrong, you have these super high-value crops that won't get enough bees for pollination.' Losing hives at Honeyrun Farms Back at Barnes' hives in Ohio, thousands of honeybees fly around as he gathers boxes to take back to his farm for honey production. Nearby, a couple of his bees land on milkweed flowers, a rare bit of plant diversity in an area dominated by corn and soybean fields. For Barnes, who operates Honeyrun Farm with his wife, Jayne, one of the challenges heat can pose to his 500 honeybee hives is fending off parasitic mites that threaten the bees. If temperatures get too hot, he can't apply formic acid, an organic chemical that kills the mites. If it's applied when it's too hot, the bees could die. Last year they lost almost a third of the 400 hives they sent to California to help pollinate commercial almond groves. Barnes thinks those hives may have been in poor health ahead of pollination because they were unable to ward off mites when it was hot months earlier. 'Dead hives aren't pollinating the almonds,' he said. 'It's a real ripple effect that stems back from the heat in the summertime.' Sometimes the heat helps. Here in Ohio, Barnes' hives last summer produced a bumper crop of honey as they feasted on nearby soybean nectar as the plants bloomed in the heat. Still, the lack of diverse plants for bees to forage in an area dominated by corn and soybean fields isn't ideal. And even the native blooms are appearing erratically, Barnes said. In autumn, his bees search for food on goldenrod, but those blooms are appearing later. And even then, he has supplemented his hive with additional food to keep them healthy into the winter. 'Every single plant that blooms is something that the bee can use,' Barnes said. 'And every single plant is affected by climate change.' Research that may aid bees is in peril It's only in the last decade that people have become aware of the magnitude of the pollinator decline globally, said Harrison, of Arizona State University. Data is limited on how much climate change and heat stress is contributing to pollinator decline. 'It's a relatively new focus for biology," he said. 'I think it's super important, but it's not being studied a ton.' The Trump administration's proposed budget would eliminate the research program that funds the USGS Bee Lab, which supports the inventory, monitoring and natural history of the nation's wild bees. Other grants for bee research are also in jeopardy. U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon said America's pollinators are in 'grave danger,' and he'll fight for the federal funding. Pollinators contribute to the health of the planet, the crops we grow and the food we eat, he said. 'Rather than taking bold action to protect them, the Trump administration has proposed a reckless budget that would zero out funding for critical research aimed at saving important pollinators,' he said in a statement to The Associated Press. Harrison said his research on this topic would come to a halt if cuts are made to his federal funding, and it would be more difficult in general for scientists to study the disappearance of bees and other pollinators and improve how they prevent these losses. Not being able to manage these pollinator deaths could cause the price of fruits, vegetables, nuts, coffee and chocolate to jump or become scarce. 'Hopefully, even if such research is defunded in the U.S., such research will continue in Europe and China, preventing these extreme scenarios,' said Harrison. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Biogen beefs up North Carolina manufacturing ahead of potential drug tariff storm
July 21 (Reuters) - Biogen (BIIB.O), opens new tab will invest $2 billion more in its existing manufacturing plants in North Carolina, the drugmaker said on Monday, as it seeks to expand in the U.S. amid President Donald Trump's tariff threats. Biogen joins major drugmakers such as Eli Lilly(LLY.N), opens new tab, Roche (ROG.S), opens new tab and Merck, who have all announced investments in the U.S. as the industry braces for potential import levies. Drugs have so far been exempt from Trump's reciprocal tariffs, but he has often argued that separate levies are needed to bolster domestic manufacturing and avoid relying on other countries for medicine supply. Earlier this month, Trump said the tariffs may be delayed, but could be as high as 200%. On Monday, Biogen said it will invest in North Carolina's Research Triangle Park (RTP), the home of its largest manufacturing plants that produce key therapies for multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer's. The investments will expand Biogen's ability to develop and produce certain gene-targeting therapies, and add fill‑finish facilities, automation and artificial intelligence, the company said. The drugmaker has invested about $10 billion in its North Carolina manufacturing to date. It has seven factories in the state with an eighth expected to start working in the second half of 2025.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Boy or girl? Chance of having a son or daughter is NOT 50/50, scientists say
From flipping a coin to guessing the outcome of a yes/no question, there are many things that have a 50/50 chance of happening. For years, it was assumed that the chance of having a son or daughter also fit into this category. But a shocking new study has revealed that this isn't actually the case. Scientists from Harvard University have discovered that some women are much more likely to have children of only one sex. In their study, the team analysed data from more than 58,000 mothers who had given birth to at least one child. Their results revealed that maternal age plays a key role in determining the sex of the babies. 'The human sex ratio has long been of interest of biologists, statisticians, demographers, sociologists, and economists,' the team explained. 'Here, we showed that within each sibship size, sex at birth did not conform with a simple binomial distribution and identified a significant intramother correlation in offspring sex.' The sex of a baby is determined by the combination of sex chromosomes inherited from the sperm and egg. While the egg always carries an X chromosome, the sperm can either carry an X or a Y. If the sperm carrying an X chromosome fertilises the egg, the embryo will be female, while the embryo will be male if it's a Y chromosome. This has long been considered to be a 50/50 split. However, in their new study, published in Science Advances, the scientists questioned whether this is really the case. 'Several coauthors, however, observed cases of friends, colleagues, first-degree relatives, or themselves that produce offspring of only one sex raising questions about chance,' the team explained. To get to the bottom of it, the team analysed data from 58,007 US women who had had at least two children. The researchers investigated the impact of eight maternal traits - height, body mass index, race, hair colour, blood type, chronotype (whether or not you're an early bird or a night owl), age at first menstruation, and the age when they had their first child. What determines the sex of a baby? The sex of a baby is determined by the combination of sex chromosomes inherited from the sperm and egg. While the egg always carries an X chromosome, the sperm can either carry an X or a Y. If the sperm carrying an X chromosome fertilises the egg, the embryo will be female, while the embryo will be male if it's a Y chromosome. Seven of these traits did not impact the sex of the baby. However, their analysis uncovered a key link between the age at which the mother had their first child, and whether or not they had boys or girls. Women who were older than 28 when they first gave birth had a 43 per cent chance of having children of only one sex. But women who were younger than 23 when they first became a mother only had a 34 per cent chance of having children of only one sex. 'Older maternal age may be associated with higher odds of having single-sex offspring, but other heritable, demographic, and/or reproductive factors were unrelated to offspring sex,' the researchers explained. The reason for this link remains unclear. However, the researchers say it could be associated with the physiological changes women go through as they age - including a shorter follicular phase, and a lower vaginal pH. 'A shorter follicular phase tends to favor Y chromosome survival, whereas a more acidic vaginal environment favors X chromosome survival,' the team explained. 'Each woman may have a different predisposition to each of these factors as they age, which could lead to a higher probability of consistently producing same-sex offspring. 'However, these mechanisms remain speculative, and more detailed data are required to confirm these hypotheses.' Overall, the findings suggest that the chance of having a boy or girl is not 50/50 after all. 'Families desiring offspring of more than one sex who have already had two or three children of the same sex should be aware that when trying for their next one, they are probably doing a coin toss with a two-headed coin,' they team concluded.
