logo
Trump Cuts Likely to Curtail Study of Climate Change's Health Effects

Trump Cuts Likely to Curtail Study of Climate Change's Health Effects

New York Times17-04-2025

With frequent and severe disasters repeatedly underscoring the dangers of climate change, scientists across the country have been working to understand the consequences for our hearts, lungs, brains and more — and how to best mitigate them.
The work has relied largely on hundreds of millions of dollars in grants from the National Institutes of Health, a federal agency within the Department of Health and Human Services. But since Robert F. Kennedy Jr. took charge of H.H.S., the Trump administration has indicated that it will stop funding research on the health effects of climate change.
The N.I.H. said in an internal document obtained by The New York Times that it was the agency's new policy 'not to prioritize' research related to climate change. The document also described the organization's intent not to fund research on gender identity, vaccine hesitancy or diversity, equity and inclusion. N.I.H. employees were instructed to tell researchers to 'remove all' mention of the topics and resubmit their applications, even if the main focus was unrelated.
The policy shift on climate change, first reported by ProPublica, stands to drastically limit U.S.-based research into its health effects, which tries to answer questions like whether events like wildfires and heat waves can affect cardiovascular health and pregnancy.
A spokeswoman for H.H.S. said in a statement that the agency was 'taking action to terminate research funding that is not aligned with N.I.H. and H.H.S. priorities.' Later, an N.I.H. spokeswoman sent a statement with slightly different wording, saying the agency was 'taking action to review, and in some cases freeze or terminate' funding.
Both spokeswomen said the N.I.H. and H.H.S. were prioritizing research that they believed 'directly affects the health of Americans' and was in line with the 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda. That includes studying the causes of chronic disease, a focus of Mr. Kennedy's.
But Shohreh Farzan, an associate professor at the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine, said that climate change events were 'already directly impacting the health of Americans,' and that one of the best ways to prevent chronic disease was to identify potential causes and symptoms as early as possible.
Dr. Farzan has received N.I.H. funding to study the effects of wildfires and extreme heat on children's cardiovascular health.
Already, a range of conditions have been linked to extreme weather, including asthma flare-ups, heart attacks, strokes and mental health problems, scientists said. One study found last month that firefighters who fought the Los Angeles blazes in January had elevated lead and mercury in their blood. Scientists have also discovered that some wildfire smoke contains substances associated with chronic conditions like heart disease.
So far, grant recipients have been unable to get answers from direct contacts at N.I.H. about their funding, which they said would be difficult to replace, if not impossible.
'There's nothing that comes close,' Dr. Farzan said. 'This could be a really devastating loss to scientists who have worked for years with a goal of keeping people healthy.'
Without N.I.H. funding, 'only a small fraction' of the research at the recently created Cincinnati Center on Climate Change and Health could continue, said Ardythe L. Morrow, the organization's co-director. The center, part of the University of Cincinnati, has been studying the effects of extreme heat on the immune system and assessing ways to protect high-risk populations.
Grants from foundations are typically smaller than N.I.H. grants, and even wealthy philanthropists' resources don't compare to the government's. Relying on them would leave the country 'flying blind' as it figures out how to combat climate change's health consequences, said Lyndsey Darrow, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Nevada, Reno.
'The health effects of climate change are happening whether or not we fund the science to understand them,' said Dr. Darrow, who is finishing up an N.I.H.-funded project on extreme heat. Her research has found that heat waves increase the likelihood of premature births, especially among groups such as women under 30 and people of color.
Research related to the effects of climate change only used a minimal percentage of N.I.H. funding. In 2024 and 2025, the N.I.H. funded at least 16 studies on the effects of wildfire smoke, and at least seven on extreme heat, out of thousands of total funded studies. But interest in the area had increased.
Several studies are focused on wildfires that spread from forest and brush to highly populated areas, as occurred in Los Angeles. Many questions remain about the health effects of these fires because, until recently, they were rare. What chemicals are in the smoke, and how does that differ by location? What are the short- and long-term effects?
Extreme heat research has similar gaps. Researchers are still trying to understand fully how heat exposure affects the body, especially over prolonged periods.
Perry Hystad, a professor in the College of Health at Oregon State University, had expected to receive a five-year N.I.H. grant to study who is most susceptible to extreme-weather exposure. He planned to follow more than 200,000 people in 27 countries, a far larger subject base than most studies. But he no longer believes he will receive the grant.
Dr. Farzan, the professor at the University of Southern California, feels similarly. If she loses the N.I.H. grant she currently has, she does not expect to be able to replace it.
'Our work isn't driven by politics or ideology,' she said. 'It's driven by the idea that we can do things now to protect the future health of our children and make our communities places that will be more able to withstand the impacts of extreme events.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Here's why SpaceX faces a bright future as government contractor despite Musk-Trump divorce
Here's why SpaceX faces a bright future as government contractor despite Musk-Trump divorce

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Here's why SpaceX faces a bright future as government contractor despite Musk-Trump divorce

The public breakup between Elon Musk and President Trump has cast a pall over the future of SpaceX – but the mogul's company should remain on a solid trajectory because the two sides need each other. Trump has counted on his estranged First Buddy's privately owned firm to fulfill the administration's plans for NASA to return to the moon, ongoing operations at the International Space Station, a reported classified deal with US intelligence to build hundreds of spy satellites and expanding internet access to rural parts of America. SpaceX – known for building and launching rockets, and the Starlink satellite internet network – has approximately $22 billion in government contracts on the books, according to Reuters. That includes a roughly $5 billion deal to build the Dragon spacecraft for use by NASA, which Musk threatened to decommission in his unhinged social media rants aimed at Trump – only to later reverse course hours later. Trump threatened to end Musk's federal contracts in response to the verbal onslaught, which included the allegation that Trump is 'in the Epstein files' and that he would have 'lost the election' without his help. 'Trump could certainly cancel most deals and contracts if he wants but the government may still have to pay them – depends on the contract details,' a Republican consultant connected with Trump, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about the feud, told The Post on Friday. The two men appeared no closer to a detente, with Trump refusing to get on the phone with his former DOGE cost-cutter and largest campaign benefactor after he blasted the White House-backed 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' While that makes for great theater, the split probably works in both of their favors, according to the source. 'Trump and Elon both got what they wanted here,' the GOP consultant said. 'Elon was able to distance himself from Trump in a public enough way to get his businesses back on track and Trump was able to have all of the MAGA warriors who were questioning the bill shut up or even defend it so they could defend Trump and prove they took his side.' SpaceX 'will be fine' despite the fireworks, the source added. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to comment on the war of words. 'President Trump is focused on making our country great again and passing the One Big Beautiful Bill,' she said. SpaceX did not immediately return a request for comment. As the founder, chairman and CEO of SpaceX, Musk is in total control with 79% of the company's voting shares as of 2023, according to a filing at the time. The closely held firm recently secured a $350 billion valuation. Overall, Musk and his businesses that also include Tesla, brain chip firm Neuralink and The Boring Company have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits, according to a recent Washington Post analysis. If Trump does decide to go to DefCon 5 on Musk, the billionaire's alleged drug use could be used as one possible lever to wriggle out of the SpaceX contracts. During Trump's first term in office in 2019, Bloomberg reported that the Pentagon was reviewing Musk's SpaceX security clearance after he smoked marijuana during an appearance on 'The Joe Rogan Experience' podcast. While Musk has strenuously denied misusing drugs, House Democrats this week requested details from Trump on whether he had any knowledge of Musk working 'under the influence.' The possible loss of government contracts would not be 'catastrophic' for Musk or his rocket company. 'SpaceX has developed itself into a global powerhouse that dominates most of the space industry, but there's no question that it would result in significant lost revenue and missed contract opportunities,' Justus Parmar, CEO of SpaceX investor Fortuna Investments, told Reuters. Meanwhile, MAGA firebrand Steve Bannon called for the South African-born Musk to be deported – and floated the possibility that Trump could use a Korean War-era statute called the Defense Production Act to enable a federal takeover of the privately owned company. However, the headline-grabbing proposal is likely a nonstarter. 'There's no way Bannon's idea of just taking over private companies works out long term, both because it would be litigated and because other companies would keep the US government at arm's length to avoid future similar issues,' the consultant said. 'Neither outcome is workable.'

Pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca sues Utah Attorney General over discount medication law
Pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca sues Utah Attorney General over discount medication law

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca sues Utah Attorney General over discount medication law

SALT LAKE CITY () — The pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca has filed a federal lawsuit against Utah Attorney General Derek Brown and Utah Insurance Commissioner Jon Pike over a recent law that is intended to allow more pharmacies to have access to drug discount programs. In a lawsuit filed May 23, AstraZeneca alleges that Utah SB 69 is unconstitutional. The law was introduced and passed in the 2025 General Assembly, and it went into effect on May 7. The law prohibits drug manufacturers from restricting pharmacies from working with 340B entities, which help pharmacies and patients access medications at a discounted price. Senator Lee responds to the Trump-Musk feud The 340B Drug Pricing Program is a that 'enables covered entities to stretch scarce federal resources as far as possible, reaching more eligible patients and providing more comprehensive services,' according to the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) website. It means that drug manufacturers participating in Medicaid agree to provide 'outpatient drugs to covered entities at significantly reduced prices.' All organizations need to be registered and enrolled in the 340B program in order to purchase discounted medications. The law that established the 340B Program, Section 340B(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act, specified certain types of for the program, such as medical centers that serve rural and other underserved communities and clinics that specialize in particular diseases like HIV/AIDS. SB 69 expands the scope, requiring drug manufacturers to provide the discounts to third-party pharmacies that are contracting with 340B entities, and this is what AstraZeneca is claiming is unconstitutional in its lawsuit. Utah House Republicans elect new leadership members The lawsuit states that because price controls 'disincentivize innovation and destabilize markets,' Congress chose to specifically limit the types of organizations that are eligible in Section 340B. The suit notes that for-profit pharmacies like Walgreens or CVS were not included as eligible, and there have already been several federal court cases ruling that block efforts to require drug manufacturers to provide discounts to contracted pharmacies. AstraZeneca claims in its suit that SB 69 'requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to offer 340B-discounted pricing for sales at an unlimited number of contract pharmacies,' expanding 340B discounts to 'an entirely new category of transactions not covered by Section 340B itself.' The suit alleges that SB 69 directly conflicts with federal law requirements, and therefore, it cannot be enforced against Astrazeneca or other drug manufacturers. AstraZeneca is asking the court to declare SB 69 unconstitutional and to order that Utah AG Derek Brown and Insurance Commissioner Jon Pike not enforce the law against AstraZeneca. Musk floats 'The American Party' after Trump tiff Myths VS Facts: What health officials want you to know about the MMR vaccine Good4Utah Road Tour: Willard Bay State Park Lori Vallow Daybell back in court, charged with conspiracy to murder ex nephew-in-law Man charged with assault for allegedly attacking and strangling neighbor Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

UCSD students protest Trump cuts to science research funding
UCSD students protest Trump cuts to science research funding

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

UCSD students protest Trump cuts to science research funding

SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — For the second time this year, students and faculty at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) staged a protest outside Geisel Library, demanding the federal government reverse deep education funding cuts imposed by the Trump administration — cuts they say are threatening research, jobs and the future of scientific innovation. Dozens of protesters gathered on campus, holding signs and sharing personal stories about how the loss of federal research grants is impacting their work and well-being. Dozens possibly detained by federal officials amid immigration raids in Los Angeles 'This year has been filled with many moments of insecurity,' said Eleanor Ketterer-Sykes, a first-year Ph.D. student in the neuroscience program. 'UCSD is one of the best science schools in the country because of its renowned research labs, you have access to labs at the Salk Institute, Sanford and Scripps as well as the VA Hospital — but that future is in jeopardy.' The Trump administration has canceled hundreds of research grants in recent months, citing concerns over 'ideologically driven science.' The cuts have targeted studies ranging from HIV prevention to violence prevention in children. UCSD Chancellor Pradeep Khosla warned in an April letter that the university stands to lose between $75 million and $500 million annually as a result. 'As of May 30, there have been more than 150 federal grants terminated, resulting in a loss of $30 million,' said Lisa Eyler, a UCSD psychiatry professor. 'These cuts are already leading to layoffs among instructors, staff scientists, and support personnel like librarians.' 'No Kings Day' protests planned across California on June 14 The ripple effects could be felt beyond UCSD. Stanley Maloy, emeritus professor of microbiology at San Diego State University, said the cuts threaten the pipeline of future scientists and engineers. 'Reduced positions mean talented students are left behind,' Maloy said. 'As this innovation workforce dries up, our economy is going to suffer.' Eyler echoed those concerns, warning of a generational loss in scientific progress. 'There will be a gaping hole in the pipeline of future scientists, engineers and healthcare providers, which could result in the potential loss of an entire generation of great scientific thinkers,' she said. Thousands in San Diego protest cuts to federal education funds For Ketterer-Sykes, the issue is personal. She entered the neuroscience program hoping to make life-saving breakthroughs. 'So many people rely on scientific innovation — whether it be to find cures for diseases like tuberculosis or Alzheimer's disease,' she said. 'It really is vital to humanity.' While the exact financial toll remains uncertain, university leaders say the impact is already being felt — and may only get worse. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store