logo
NIH scientists speak out over estimated $12 billion in Trump funding cuts

NIH scientists speak out over estimated $12 billion in Trump funding cuts

Time of India2 days ago

Los Angeles: 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.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US green card rule change: New medical form needed each time you apply
US green card rule change: New medical form needed each time you apply

Business Standard

time2 hours ago

  • Business Standard

US green card rule change: New medical form needed each time you apply

Now, you will have to re-submit your medical form each time you apply for green card. In a fresh move by the Donald Trump administration, the US has changed the rules for green card applicants. From now on, the medical form submitted with an application—Form I-693—will no longer remain valid if that application is denied or withdrawn. You'll need a new one each time you apply. The new rule came into effect immediately after a notification from the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on June 11, 2025. 'Form I-693, Report of Immigration Medical Examination and Vaccination Record, signed by a civil surgeon on or after November 1, 2023, is only valid while the application the Form I-693 was submitted with is pending,' said USCIS. 'If the application a Form I-693 was submitted with is withdrawn or denied, that Form I-693 is no longer valid.' This update applies to all applications pending or filed on or after June 11, 2025. What changed and why? Until now, applicants were allowed to reuse their medical forms indefinitely, as long as they were completed after November 1, 2023. This policy was introduced in April 2024 to help applicants avoid delays or repeat visits to civil surgeons. But in its latest notification, USCIS said this approach was 'overly broad' and could 'potentially threaten public health.' 'By limiting the validity period to only the current immigration benefit application or request, we ensure that aliens get timely and proper medical examinations and treatment, which safeguards public health,' the agency added. Other green card changes under Trump USCIS has made several other changes to green card processing over the last year: 1. Social media disclosure proposal • Announced in March 2025 • Would require green card, asylum, refugee and naturalisation applicants to list social media handles • Open for public comment until May 5, 2025 2. Hold on asylum and refugee green cards • Started in late March 2025 • Processing paused for extra fraud and security reviews 3. Covid??'19 vaccine no longer required • USCIS stopped issuing RFEs or NOIDs related to Covid-19 vaccination from January 20, 2025 • The CDC removed COVID-19 from the required vaccine list on March 11, 2025 4. Extended green card validity for renewals • Since September 10, 2024, green cards are automatically extended for 36 months while Form I??'90 renewal is pending

Trump wants cheaper drugs like Europe has. How it works.
Trump wants cheaper drugs like Europe has. How it works.

Mint

time3 hours ago

  • Mint

Trump wants cheaper drugs like Europe has. How it works.

President Donald Trump doesn't just want to bring down prescription drug prices for Americans. He wants European countries to raise them to make up the revenue that drugmakers would lose from his policy. Trump is proposing a so-called most-favored-nation pricing model, which would set U.S. drug prices at the lowest level in other wealthy countries. But the pharmaceutical industry isn't buying into tying drug prices in the U.S. to prices in Europe—at least not knowing the details of the president's proposal. More details about the government's pricing model could come this week. On May 12, Trump directed government health officials to benchmark drug prices to international standards within 30 days. The lobbying group PhRMA, with members including U.S. pharma giants Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and AbbVie, has argued there are two reasons why U.S. drug prices are high: foreign countries not paying 'their fair share" for medicines, and middlemen such as pharmacy-benefit managers. Today, U.S. drug pricing is largely market driven. It involves negotiations between drug manufacturers, pharmacy-benefit managers, healthcare insurers and providers. European countries do it much differently. Each has its own way of determining drug prices, but most follow one of two broad approaches. The first approach, which Germany and France use, considers the overall clinical effectiveness of a new medicine. How does the new treatment compare to existing ones? Does it have added therapeutic benefits? If the new drug is substantially better, its price would reflect that. A second approach, used by the U.K., the Netherlands, and Sweden, analyzes cost effectiveness. This model not only compares the new drug to existing ones but also assesses the incremental value that the medicine brings to the health system. After the assessments, negotiations between drugmakers and the countries begin. Because many European countries have national health systems, they are in a strong negotiation position. If government negotiators think a medicine is too expensive for its effectiveness, they won't recommend its use. How Trump's MFN policy would work in practice isn't clear. Drug prices would probably be based on list prices in Europe since the prices paid by national health systems, or net prices, are confidential. The president's open-ended directive, laid out in an executive order, has many wondering how the U.S. could raise prices in Europe. Trump has made clear he wants to close the gap between U.S. and international prices, and has suggested he would use tariffs and export controls to achieve his goal. In theory, drugmakers could set list prices higher in Europe as long as it doesn't affect net prices, health policy expert Dr. Huseyin Naci told Barron's. In the U.K., for example, a higher list price could still lower the prices in other European countries. 'So that would still not be an acceptable approach to many other European countries," said Naci, who is associate professor of health policy at the London School of Economics. Overhauling Europe's decades-old pricing approaches would require fundamental changes to their pricing regulations—and there will be 'little appetite or ability" to alter them, Naci added. Cost is another complicating factor. 'Pharmaceutical spending is already one of the top categories of spending in many countries in terms of healthcare expenditure, so there's little room to accommodate higher prices and spending for pharmaceuticals in Europe," according to Naci. How Trump is planning to make Europeans pay more for drugs is the big question. He could use tariffs and trade negotiations as leverage. In early April, the president said a 'major" tax on pharmaceutical imports is coming 'very shortly," however nothing has been announced yet. In a trade agreement with the U.K. a month later, there is a provision on pharmaceuticals that states the U.K. will 'endeavor to improve the overall environment for pharmaceutical companies." What that means in practice still isn't clear. Write to Elsa Ohlen at

Trump's new American green card policy triggers turmoil amid LA riots; what has changed, documents required, and other details
Trump's new American green card policy triggers turmoil amid LA riots; what has changed, documents required, and other details

Time of India

time8 hours ago

  • Time of India

Trump's new American green card policy triggers turmoil amid LA riots; what has changed, documents required, and other details

The Trump administration announced an immediate policy shift on Wednesday(June 11), requiring all American green card applicants to submit a new medical examination form, even if a valid version had already been submitted. The change affects Form I‑693, formerly known as the 'Report of Immigration Medical Examination and Vaccination Record.' The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) stated that the medical form will no longer be valid for reuse if a green card application is withdrawn or denied, regardless of when it was completed. Also read: LA protest 2025: Who's fueling the unrest by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 息を呑むようなファンタジーの世界に足を踏み入れ、かつてないほどゲームを制覇しましょう レイドシャドウレジェンド 今すぐインストール Undo What changed Previously, under an April 2024 rule, any I‑693 signed by a civil surgeon on or after November 1, 2023, could be used indefinitely, even if the applicant later refiled or changed visa categories. That flexibility is now gone. Live Events 'We have since determined that the April 4, 2024, policy is overly broad and could potentially threaten public health in the United States,' USCIS stated, adding that the shift would ensure applicants receive 'timely and proper medical examinations and treatment.' Starting June 11, 2025, anyone reapplying for permanent residency must retake the medical exam, even if their earlier I‑693 is still recent and technically valid. Added financial burden for applicants Medical exams by authorized civil surgeons can cost between $100 and $500, depending on the provider and region. Immigration attorneys warn that the sudden shift could mean many applicants will need to pay again. 'Time was that they would at least give you some grace period,' said immigration attorney Matt Cameron of Boston. 'This means that things that were in the mail this week are going to be invalid, potentially.' 'They have made every kind of contact with the immigration system more difficult,' Cameron added. The change follows similar abrupt shifts earlier this made last-minute changes to immigration forms in March 2025, triggering lawsuits and backlash that forced the agency to provide a two-week transition period. This time, there is no such buffer. A new version of the I‑693 form will become mandatory beginning July 3, 2025. Bigger picture The update comes as the Trump administration intensifies immigration enforcement. Federal agents detained Mahmoud Khalil in March, a green card holder and Columbia University graduate, citing his support for pro-Palestinian protests as grounds for deportation under national security concerns. Other permanent residents have reportedly been detained after returning from abroad or had their green cards revoked, actions previously seen as rare but now increasingly frequent. Though USCIS emphasizes this is about public health, critics say it's part of a pattern: adding red tape, costs, and uncertainty to discourage legal immigration. The LA protests This policy change also comes against the backdrop of massive immigrant rights protests in Los Angeles, where tensions are reaching a boiling point. Over the past week, thousands have marched through downtown LA, outraged by federal immigration raids and the arrival of National Guard and Marine forces. Protesters accuse the government of militarizing their neighborhoods and breaking up families without accountability. Community groups have since held nightly vigils, some blocking streets to protest what they call 'deportation without justice.'

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