The Morning: Trump vs. medical research
Good morning. Today, my colleague Benjamin Mueller explains how government cuts are slowing medical research. We’re also covering Emmanuel Macron, German elections and a sonnet. —David Leonhardt
Paying for science
The Trump administration stormed into office, loudly firing workers and closing diversity programs. But behind the scenes, it has also brought biomedical research to the brink of crisis by holding up much of the $47 billion the United States spends on the field every year. The world’s leading medical labs can be found in the United States, and they rely on grants from the National Institutes of Health. The agency has stopped vetting future studies on cancer, Alzheimer’s, heart disease and other ailments. Trump aides have said they just need time to review spending their predecessors had promised, but it’s unclear what they’re looking for at the N.I.H. or when scholars can expect to start receiving money again. In today’s newsletter, I’ll walk you through what happened — and why it matters. A complex machineLate last month, when the Trump administration froze government grants, a federal judge said it couldn’t just hold back money Congress had agreed to spend. But spending money at the N.I.H., which awards more than 60,000 grants per year, isn’t so simple. That’s because new grants endure a tortured bureaucratic process. The agency has to notify the public of grant review meetings in The Federal Register, a government publication. Then scientists and N.I.H. officials meet to discuss the proposals. The problem is that the Trump administration banned those announcements “indefinitely.” So new research projects can’t get approved. In effect, scientists say, the Trump administration is circumventing the court order. Health officials didn’t block research outright, but by shutting down the process, they’re still not spending much of the money Congress allocated to various research goals. The administration has also proposed other big changes, saying that universities should bear more of the “indirect costs” of research: maintaining lab space, paying support staff. Trump aides say the changes would trim administrative bloat and free up more government money for research. Labs hit pauseScientists are panicked, and hundreds of studies are at a standstill, including ones on pancreatic cancer, brain injuries and child health. Last week alone, the N.I.H. canceled 42 of 47 scheduled meetings to assess new grants. Some examples of stalled projects:
In response to all the uncertainty, universities are retrenching. The University of Pittsburgh froze Ph.D. admissions. Columbia University’s medical school paused hiring and spending. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology froze the hiring of nonfaculty employees. Some lab leaders told me they were making contingency plans to fire scientists. Graduate students are searching for new sources of funding. What next?It’s hard to say how long the holdup will last. The Trump administration hasn’t submitted a single new grant review meeting to The Federal Register since a day after it took office. And even if it started adding new ones, the agency traditionally gives several weeks’ notice. At risk are not only the tens of thousands of grants the N.I.H. awards each year, but also American dominance of biomedical research. Every dollar the agency spends on research generates more than two dollars in economic activity, the N.I.H. has said. Scores of patents follow. By some measures, the United States produces more influential health-sciences research than the next 10 leading countries combined. The science unfolds across the country, including in red states, where lawmakers have complained about proposed changes to indirect costs. Those findings often fuel pharmaceutical advancements, laying a foundation for drugs and vaccines long before private funders see such work as worth investing in. Even Ozempic traces its roots back in part to work at the N.I.H on animal venom. Scientists found that the toxin from Gila monster lizards seemed to have particular physiological effects, helping lead eventually to one of the world’s most profitable and promising drugs. New advances like those, scientists say, are in danger.
Government Overhaul
More on the Trump Administration
War in Ukraine
Israel-Hamas War
Other Big Stories
Opinions
The variety of Trump merch at CPAC, the annual gathering of conservative activists, is evidence of his singular place in the Republican Party, Katherine Miller writes. See photographs. Democrats should do nothing to oppose Trump, James Carville writes: His administration will crash and burn by itself. Here are columns by Michelle Goldberg on the F.B.I. deputy director and Thomas Edsall on Trump’s intimidation. Subscribe Today The Morning highlights a small portion of the journalism that The New York Times offers. To access all of it, become a subscriber with this introductory offer.
Trailblazers: In the late 20th century, a group of Black women created restaurants that changed New York dining. A closer read: Our critic guides you through a wild and unruly sonnet by Gwendolyn Brooks. Ask Vanessa: “Should men wear white jeans?” Pretenders: Psychologists are warning that chatbots posing as therapists could encourage users to commit harmful acts. Health: Experts explain what they do, and don’t, recommend to treat cold sores. Living Small: A couple left Brooklyn to downsize upstate. Most clicked yesterday: A photo of migrants deported from the U.S., seen through the windows of a hotel in Panama. One woman scrawled “Help” in lipstick, another held up a napkin with a plea for help. Lives Lived: Clint Hill was the Secret Service agent who leaped onto President John F. Kennedy’s limousine as it came under fire in Dallas and kept a scrambling Jacqueline Kennedy from falling. He died at 93.
N.F.L.: The Green Bay Packers submitted a proposal to the NFL’s competition committee to ban the “tush push,” a tactic of the Super Bowl-winning Eagles. Scouting Combine: Young players’ arms are measured and compared by the fraction of an inch. See what scouts look for. N.B.A.: The Bulls beat the 76ers, 142-110. Philadelphia has lost eight straight games.
One hundred years ago today, the musician Art Gillham entered a studio in New York to test a soon-to-be-transformative tool: the microphone. The technology reshaped how artists perform and how we listen. Read about how the microphone changed music. More on culture
Swirl sour cream into a bowl of gombaleves, a Hungarian creamy mushroom soup. Improve your balance. Become a better friend. Make a photo book. Protect your online accounts with a physical security key.
Here is today’s Spelling Bee. Yesterday’s pangrams were attainability, banality and inability. And here are today’s Mini Crossword, Wordle, Sudoku, Connections and Strands. Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. Correction: Yesterday’s newsletter referred incorrectly to the top prize at the Screen Actors Guild Awards. It’s awarded for the best performance by a cast, not for the best picture. Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. Reach our team at themorning@nytimes.com.
|
