Since the inauguration of President Donald Trump on January 20th, 2025, he has signed many executive orders, changing policies established from the previous administration. Additionally, the President and his team have been evaluating federally run institutions to decide the role they will play in the new administration. Last week, Trump enacted a freeze on the National Institutes of Health (NIH), halting all travel, research-grant reviews, and NIH meetings through February 1st, 2025. Writer Max Kozlov, in his Nature article covering the story, has emphasized that this unprecedented order has indefinitely suspended research-grant reviews from the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research.
Direct outcomes of the NIH freeze:
The Trump administration has not only frozen cancer research grant reviews but also travel and training for scientists within and outside of the NIH. Even more striking, is that they have taken down information about awards eligible to underrepresented groups in science. The NIH is a $47-billion institution with federal funds allocated to fund research nationwide. Such an immediate and prolonged cease in federal activity has caused many researchers to be concerned about the security of future funds. Even a 2-week delay can have major implications for the progress of research and job security. With the unprecedented halt in NIH activity, many are confused, worried, and anxious to see how the current administration will “prioritize” federal research funding.
To address policies and new administrative goals, it's customary for the recently inaugurated president to pause all NIH activity for a day. However, the customary “pause” has become an indefinite shutdown in this case. The NIH freeze also includes a halt on communications which stops federal institutes from sending mass communication emails and newsletters. As a result, federal research funding, or 80% of the NIH’s budget, will not be awarded to individuals or institutions. Research-grant reviews, called study sections, include 30 or more reviewers and are planned for months to a year in advance, and their delay or cancellation could make funding unclear to scientists who desperately need grants to fund their lab. This is particularly devastating for young faculty who are trying to reach tenure. In many cases, new faculty need funding to demonstrate independence and the ability to maintain a lab before being eligible for a promotion. Consequently, the indefinite pause in research-grant reviews can potentially delay career growth and stability by removing the necessary funding to compete in an already competitive job market.
Many scientists are devastated and concerned by the freeze. Meredith Wadman and Jocelyn Kaiser describe the reactions in a Science article published right after the announcement. NIH employees and other researchers have voiced uncertainty with the freeze, calling it “devasting” as scientists and physicians lose resources. For example, the communication pause has restricted a weekly report on disease statistics from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report informs scientists and physicians on how to best provide care to US citizens with recent disease outbreaks.
The Trump administration has also cut diversity programs and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) material from the NIH website. This reflects President Trump’s first day in office, where he expressed a radical concern for “wasteful” diversity programs run by the government. In an attempt to end all efforts to fund underrepresented scientists and DEI initiatives, the Trump administration has erased information related to overcoming systemic racism and promoting diversity from the NIH website.
As the US scientific community becomes more diverse, the NIH has been criticized for a lack of diversity among research grant awardees. Unfortunately, the removal of diversity programs is a major step backward as other scientific organizations, such as the American Association of the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the American Association of Cancer Research (AACR), make DEI within science a priority, offering opportunities to those underrepresented in research. Previously, the NIH offered research-grant awards to improve diversity in science specifically. These awards, called diversity supplements, provide training to young scientists for up to 5 years with $125,000. Most NIH grants for researchers can range from $500,000 to a million dollars. Comparatively, $125,000 is not a large sum, and it goes toward training a diverse pool of future scientists. This freeze also halts study sections for other training grants that fund students’ research and help them transition to their next career phase. A major concern among students, postdoctoral fellows, young faculty, and mentors is the impact of training and the ability to carve out a career path in science.
The NIH freeze also prevents the hiring of new staff and the office has rescinded job offers to those starting after February 8th. The NIH website also deleted all job vacancies, and there is no indication of what this means for the future of the federal institute. Deleting job postings and rescinding job offers at this scale has never been seen before in an administration.
There has not been any further information on the NIH freeze as the administration has also recently halted other federal funds. The nation is holding its breath waiting to see what comes next and if we can sustain our healthcare and overall well-being through government-funded programs. Regarding research, it is clear that scientific funding is not highly prioritized. Many scientists, physicians, and researchers are waiting for study sections to resume and funds to be released. However, the continued delay in NIH operations will have a long-term effect on the nation’s research programs and push them behind other competing countries. Moreover, the lack of DEI and promotion of underrepresented scientists will reduce diversity in scientific fields and silence unique scientific perspectives that are known to benefit scientific innovation. Overall, this freeze has already limited funds and stunted research progress. Scientists and researchers are waiting with the rest of the world to see what the administration does next in hopes that they can continue research to improve medical treatments and advance science.
NIH, Max Kozlov, Nature, Nature (2), Meredith Wadman, Jocelyn Kaiser, Science, Science (2), CDC, The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, AAAS
