Fallout from Trump research cuts expands across academia
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Trump administration spending cuts and freezes to federal grants are roiling major academic medical research programs, prompting layoffs, and leading administrators to abandon studies and rescind admissions offers to graduate students.
Why it matters: Experts predict the face of university research could be permanently changed, affecting work on treatments for cancer, Alzheimer's, and diabetes, among other conditions, along with studies on the underpinnings of disease.
- "There are no other revenue sources that could cover those costs," said Jonathan Teyan, CEO of the Associated Medical Schools of New York. The National Institutes of Health "is the single-largest funder of science in the nation and you can't just sort of shift costs from other areas to cover this."
State of play: The University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School rescinded provisional offers to dozens of biomedical Ph.D. students this month, "to ensure that our current students' progress is not disrupted" amid funding uncertainties, a spokesperson told Axios.
- Johns Hopkins University last week moved to eliminate more than 2,200 staff positions, including 247 in the U.S., following the termination of more than $800 million in USAID funding, primarily to its school of public health and a global health affiliate.
- The termination of more than 400 NIH grants to Columbia University over its handling of Gaza protests will directly impact Alzheimer's and cancer research, Notus reported. It also likely tanked a landmark 30-year-diabetes prevention study, Stat reported.
- Elsewhere, Stanford announced a hiring freeze tied to NIH cuts, Baylor's College of Medicine said it will scale back expansion plans and trim its incoming graduate school class while Emory's public health school warned of "potentially radical adjustments."
The other side: "The Trump administration is committed to restoring the 'Gold Standard' of scientific research by restoring transparency with how our taxpayer dollars are being spent while cutting waste and bureaucratic overhead," White House spokesman Kush Desai told Axios via email.
- Administration officials have defended capping NIH funding for universities' overhead costs, saying billions of funds could be reallocated to direct project costs. They've also argued USAID cuts align with the president's "America First" policy.
- But the scope of the cuts have left many institutions without options. Teyan said capping NIH funding for indirect costs at 15% would result in a $630 million cut in New York alone. Universities have said funding for indirect costs, such as for overhead, are crucial for conducting research itself.
What to watch: Some U.S. scientists affected by the cuts are being recruited to work abroad, and foreign-born researchers are beginning to consider the jump, Nature reported.
- Canada has been at the forefront of efforts to recruit disenchanted American researchers, with officials there saying universities have room to bring on more talent.
- A university in France launched a program called A Safe Place for Science, announcing funding to bring on about 15 new researchers, according to Science.
Yes, but: Those nations may have funding troubles of their own and can only absorb so much talent.
What we're watching: It's still possible that courts could reverse some of the cuts, as they have the dismissals of provisional federal employees at certain departments and agencies.
- Last week's deal to fund the government through Sept. 30 will likely result in a 3.7% cut from the estimated FY24 funding levels for federal research and development, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
- One concern is whether the Trump administration will actually spend that money, or make steeper cuts through a rescissions package that could further buffet biomedical research, Nature reported.
