Researchers are alarmed by former President Trump’s proposed freeze on science funding.
Just two days after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, Evangeline Warren, a PhD student in sociology at Ohio State University, joined a professional development workshop with other young researchers. Most of the attendees were either employed by or receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest funder of biomedical and behavioral research.
Mid-presentation, a senior organizer interrupted to inform participants that the NIH had been “restricted from any external communication.” Without further explanation, the video call abruptly ended. Warren’s experience wasn’t isolated—during the first week of Trump’s second term, hundreds of scientists reported similar disruptions on Bluesky, a decentralized alternative to Twitter, citing canceled meetings and sudden changes to government-funded science projects. These interruptions were part of a broader communications freeze imposed by the administration, which had already suspended reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), halted U.S. collaboration with the World Health Organization, and imposed travel bans on Health and Human Services staff.
Though brief pauses in communication during a presidential transition are common, the indefinite disruption of the grant process was unprecedented. For many researchers at the NIH and affiliated universities, the cancellations of critical meetings and appointments seemed to signal the beginning of a more significant attack on public health and scientific progress.
While the Trump administration had previously proposed deep cuts to the NIH, the agency remained largely unaffected due to congressional support. However, now with allies like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. poised to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, scientists worry that this freeze marks the start of a serious decline in public scientific research. If NIH-funded research grinds to a halt, essential advancements in fields like cancer, diabetes, and infectious disease may face major delays.
The communications freeze, ordered last Tuesday, affected all agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, including the NIH, FDA, and CDC, stopping public releases of scientific reports, social media posts, and public health data until February 1. The following day, anxious researchers flooded Bluesky and Reddit with reports of canceled meetings, rescinded job offers, and grant suspensions, unsure whether these actions were tied to the freeze or a broader disruption in operations.
NIH funding is vital for most biomedical research, both in academia and the private sector. Researchers constantly apply for grants to fund labs, buy supplies, and pay staff, and NIH grants make up a significant portion of that funding. The application process is complex, requiring months of planning to organize review panels, and delays can have long-lasting impacts on projects. This freeze affects clinical trials as well, with some individuals reporting canceled appointments for potentially life-saving treatments.
In addition to the freeze on research, NIH staff were informed that purchases and equipment repairs would also be suspended, hindering the procurement of basic supplies and potentially derailing ongoing experiments. This is especially concerning as many scientific studies depend on precise timing, and even small delays can disrupt an entire project.
Further complicating matters, an email from the Department of Health and Human Services informed employees that all diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) offices would be closed, and related contracts terminated. The email warned that failure to report certain information within 10 days could result in serious consequences.
As the situation remains unclear, NIH researchers continue to grapple with confusion and uncertainty. With the interim leadership in place and the director position vacant, there is no clear guidance on how to navigate the freeze. The appointment of Jay Bhattacharya, Trump’s nominee to lead the NIH, has not yet been confirmed, leaving a leadership vacuum that many fear will only further complicate the agency’s mission.
Leave a Reply