For much of Living memory, the United States has been a world leader of scientific research and innovation. From the polyomyelitis vaccine, to the decoding of the first human chromosome, to the first cardiac bypass surgery, US research has originated a seemingly endless list of progress of medical care that is taken for granted.
But when the Trump administration issued a memorando on Monday that pausted all federal subsidies and loans—With the objective of ensuring that financing recipients comply with the raft of the president of the recent executive orders, the United States Academy stopped. Since then, freezing has been partially rescinded for some sectors, but to a large extent it remains established for universities and research institutions throughout the country, without certainty of what comes next.
“This has an immediate impact on people’s lives,” he says J9 AustinProfessor of Psychiatry and Medical Genetics at the University of British Columbia. “And it’s scary.”
Freezing the financing requires that the agencies present reviews of their programs financed to the Office of Administration and Budget for February 10. Freezing follows separate orders issued last week to the health agencies of the United States, including national health institutes, which leads the country’s medical research. -to Pause all communications Until February 1 and stop almost all trips indefinitely.
The confusion is consummated. If the freezing of funds continues until February, and even beyond, how will postgraduate students be paid? Should subsidy requests, Yearslong in writing, still submitted for the deadline for submitting the triannual subsidy on February 5? What does this mean for clinical trials if participants and laboratory technicians cannot be paid? Should all that research be eliminated thanks to incomplete data?
Even if Trump completely reverses the freezing of research financing, damage has been done, they say multiple sources. Although for now the freezing of financing is temporary, the administration has shown how the government levers could exercise. The involvement is that withdrawing funds could be done more permanently, and individual institutions, both private and public organizations could be done. This will not only establish a precedent for the great universities of the east coast or the west coast, but those located in both red and blue states.
While it is always an imperfect agreement, science in the US is largely fund communications) and the competitive distribution of NIH funds, says Gerald Keusch, Professor Emeritus of Medicine at the University of Boston and former associate director of International Research for NIH. According to its website, the NIH disburses almost $ 48 billion in subsidies per year.
When it comes to medical research, the United States really is the first, and if you abdicate that position, the emptiness behind it has global ramifications. “In Canada, we have always looked for NiH as an example of what we should be trying to do,” says Austin, who speaks to me regardless of any roles and affiliations. “Now, that collapsed.”
Science is, in its own nature, collaborative. Many consortiums and alliances within the scientific fields cross the borders and the barriers of language. Some laboratories can find additional funds from alternative sources such as the European Union. But it is unlikely that a continuous withdrawal of NIH funds can be connected by support abroad. And it is unlikely that Big Pharma, with his seemingly endless funds, also does not try, according to the sources he spoke with.