Top-ranking NIH official forced to retire under Trump administration
A top-ranking scientist at the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Lawrence Tabak, was forced to retire this week, multiple people familiar with the move say, marking the highest-profile departure of a health official under the Trump administration so far this year.
Tabak's retirement, which he told colleagues was effective Tuesday, ends a decades-long tenure serving at the federal medical research agency, including multiple years as the acting director of the NIH during the COVID-19 pandemic. He also served as the agency's top ethics official.
An email circulated among NIH staff from Tabak did not explain why he was abruptly stepping down, which multiple people familiar with the decision said came earlier than he was planning. One person said he did not plan to retire until at least the fall.
Tabak told one federal researcher that he said he "found it necessary to retire today from federal service." A former colleague said Tabak, who should have been the second-in-command at the agency, had been excluded from key meetings.
Tabak and spokespeople for the National Institutes of Health did not immediately return requests for comment.
"He has helped shape important policy decisions at NIH over four administrations. He has guided NIH through complex issues and will be sorely missed," acting NIH Director Dr. Matthew Memoli said in an email Wednesday afternoon to NIH staff announcing the retirement.
The departure follows years of intense scrutiny of Tabak from Republican lawmakers at multiple congressional hearings, when he faced questioning over issues like the agency's oversight of "gain-of-function" research on viruses, which can make them more dangerous and is supposed to be tightly controlled, as well as grants to the EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Under the Biden administration, the inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services found in a review of grants dating back to 2014 that the NIH missed opportunities to avoid paying for $89,171 in costs to the groups that should not have been allowed, like vague employee bonuses. It also faulted the NIH for not doing more to ensure its funds did not go towards gain-of-function research.
Tabak's retirement also comes amid ongoing court battles over a decision last week to make steep cuts to the amount of money for facilities and administration costs that the federal government has agreed to pay for in medical research.
A federal judge has for now temporarily blocked those cuts nationwide, pending further arguments in lawsuits brought by medical colleges, universities and state attorneys general.
Several scientists have come out to praise Tabak, who was often tasked as the agency's principal deputy director to handle difficult problems at the NIH.
"Larry was brilliant at deflecting credit away from himself in order to raise up colleagues, mentees, and those who might otherwise have lacked a voice," posted Carrie Wolinetz, a former senior adviser to the NIH director.
In addition to his administrative duties, Tabak also continued to lead a team within the NIH publishing biochemistry research.
Jordan Lara, a research fellow in Tabak's lab at the NIH, praised him for having "always made time" for mentorship and scientific research.
"He would work 80 hours a week regularly with no days off. He truly gave himself up for the American public. it's absolutely insane to have him cast out like this and to paint him as anything other than a dedicated public servant," said Lara in a message.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Judge Deems Trump's National Institutes Of Health Grant Cuts Illegal
BOSTON (Reuters) -A federal judge in Boston on Monday said the termination of National Institutes of Health grants for research on diversity-related topics by President Donald Trump's administration was "void and illegal," and accused the government of discriminating against racial minorities and LGBT people. U.S. District Judge William Young during a non-jury trial said the NIH violated federal law by arbitrarily canceling more than $1 billion in research grants because of their perceived connection to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Young said he was reinstating grants that had been awarded to organizations and Democratic-led states that sued over the terminations. And the judge indicated that as the case proceeds he could issue a more sweeping decision. "This represents racial discrimination and discrimination against America's LGBTQ community," said Young, an appointee of Republican former President Ronald Reagan. "Any discrimination by our government is so wrong that it requires the court to enjoin it and at an appropriate time, I'm going to do it." Referring to the termination of grants for research related to issues involving racial minorities, the judge said he had in four decades on the bench "never seen a record where racial discrimination was so palpable." "You are bearing down on people of color because of their color," the judge said, referring to Trump's administration. "The Constitution will not permit that." Andrew Nixon, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the agency stands by its decision to end funding for research "that prioritized ideological agendas over scientific rigor and meaningful outcomes for the American people," and is considering an appeal. "Under the leadership of Secretary Kennedy and the Trump administration, HHS is committed to ensuring that taxpayer dollars support programs rooted in evidence-based practices and gold standard science – not driven by divisive DEI mandates or gender ideology," Nixon said in a statement, referring to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Rachel Meeropol of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the grant recipients who sued, said Young's ruling applies to hundreds of grants. The plaintiffs include the American Public Health Association, a membership organization for public health researchers, and 16 states led by Massachusetts. The NIH, the world's leading funder of biomedical and behavioral research, has terminated 2,100 research grants totaling about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since Trump took office in January, according to a letter that dozens of NIH employees signed last week, protesting the cuts. The funding cuts are part of Trump's wide-ranging actions to reshape the government, slash federal spending and end government support for DEI programs and transgender healthcare. The administration's plans to cut 10,000 jobs at health agencies including NIH have been temporarily blocked by another federal judge. Trump also has signed a series of executive orders requiring agencies to ensure grant funds do not promote "gender ideology" and to end support of what it sees as discriminatory DEI programs. Conservative critics of DEI programs have portrayed them as discriminatory against white people and certain others. In line with Trump's policy agenda, the NIH has instructed staff to terminate grant funding for studies related to DEI programs, transgender issues, COVID-19 and ways to curb vaccine hesitancy, and grants that could potentially benefit Chinese universities. The trial that Young held on Monday concerned only some of the claims in the consolidated lawsuits over the cuts. The judge will consider others later. Young said he would give the parties an opportunity to present further evidence before he rules on those claims and decides whether to reinstate grants beyond those awarded to the plaintiffs. Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey in a statement said Young's ruling was welcome, but that the NIH cuts had already halted crucial research into cures for disease including cancer and Alzheimer's. "He forced our research universities to lay off staff and rescind PhD offers. And he handed China and other foreign countries the opportunity to recruit away our researchers, scientists and entrepreneurs," said Healey, a Democrat. (Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York and Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi, Will Dunham and Matthew Lewis)
an hour ago
FDA to offer faster drug reviews to companies promoting 'national priorities'
WASHINGTON -- U.S. regulators will begin offering faster reviews to new medicines that administration officials deem as promoting 'the health interests of Americans,' under a new initiative announced Tuesday. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary said the agency will aim to review select drugs in one to two months. FDA's long-standing accelerated approval program generally issues decisions in six months for drugs that treat life-threatening diseases. Regular drug reviews take about 10 months. Since arriving at the FDA in April, Makary has repeatedly told FDA staff they need to 'challenge assumptions' and rethink procedures. In a medical journal commentary published last week, Makary suggested the agency could conduct 'rapid or instant reviews," pointing to the truncated process used to authorize the first COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed. For the new program, the FDA will issue a limited number of 'national priority vouchers' to companies 'aligned with U.S. national priorities,' the agency said in a statement. The special designation will give the selected companies access to extra FDA communications, streamlined staff reviews and the ability to submit much of their product information in advance. Speeding up drug approvals has long been a priority of the pharmaceutical industry, which has successfully lobbied Congress to create a variety of special programs and pathways for faster reviews. Many aspects of the plan announced Tuesday overlap with older programs. But the broad criteria for receiving a voucher will give FDA officials unprecedented discretion in deciding which companies can benefit from the fastest reviews. "The ultimate goal is to bring more cures and meaningful treatments to the American public,' Makary said in a statement. Makary previously said the FDA should be willing to ease its scientific requirements for certain drugs, for instance, by not always requiring randomized studies in which patients are tracked over time to track safety and effectiveness. Such trials are generally considered the gold standard of medical research, though the FDA has increasingly been willing to accept smaller, less-definitive studies for rare or life-threatening diseases. In several recent cases, the FDA has faced criticism for approving drugs based on preliminary data that didn't ultimately show benefits for patients. The push to rapidly accelerated drug approvals is the opposite approach that Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have taken on vaccines. Promising a 'return to gold-standard science,' Kennedy previously announced that all new vaccines would have to be compared to placebo, or a dummy shot, to win approval. Kennedy and Makary also have announced a stricter policy on seasonal updates to COVID-19 shots, saying they will have to undergo new testing before they can be approved for use in healthy children and most adults. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
FDA to offer faster drug reviews to companies promoting ‘national priorities'
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators will begin offering faster reviews to new medicines that administration officials deem as promoting 'the health interests of Americans,' under a new initiative announced Tuesday. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary said the agency will aim to review select drugs in one to two months. FDA's long-standing accelerated approval program generally issues decisions in six months for drugs that treat life-threatening diseases. Regular drug reviews take about 10 months. Since arriving at the FDA in April, Makary has repeatedly told FDA staff they need to 'challenge assumptions' and rethink procedures. In a medical journal commentary published last week, Makary suggested the agency could conduct 'rapid or instant reviews,' pointing to the truncated process used to authorize the first COVID-19 vaccines under Operation Warp Speed. For the new program, the FDA will issue a limited number of 'national priority vouchers' to companies 'aligned with U.S. national priorities,' the agency said in a statement. The special designation will give the selected companies access to extra FDA communications, streamlined staff reviews and the ability to submit much of their product information in advance. Speeding up drug approvals has long been a priority of the pharmaceutical industry, which has successfully lobbied Congress to create a variety of special programs and pathways for faster reviews. Many aspects of the plan announced Tuesday overlap with older programs. But the broad criteria for receiving a voucher will give FDA officials unprecedented discretion in deciding which companies can benefit from the fastest reviews. 'The ultimate goal is to bring more cures and meaningful treatments to the American public,' Makary said in a statement. Makary previously said the FDA should be willing to ease its scientific requirements for certain drugs, for instance, by not always requiring randomized studies in which patients are tracked over time to track safety and effectiveness. Such trials are generally considered the gold standard of medical research, though the FDA has increasingly been willing to accept smaller, less-definitive studies for rare or life-threatening diseases. In several recent cases, the FDA has faced criticism for approving drugs based on preliminary data that didn't ultimately show benefits for patients. The push to rapidly accelerated drug approvals is the opposite approach that Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have taken on vaccines. Promising a 'return to gold-standard science,' Kennedy previously announced that all new vaccines would have to be compared to placebo, or a dummy shot, to win approval. Kennedy and Makary also have announced a stricter policy on seasonal updates to COVID-19 shots, saying they will have to undergo new testing before they can be approved for use in healthy children and most adults. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
