The Conversation asked researchers from a range of fields to share how the Trump administration’s science funding cuts have affected them. All describe the significant losses they and their communities have experienced. But many also voice their determination to continue doing work they believe is crucial to a healthier, safer and more fair society.
Pipeline of new scientists cut off
Carrie McDonough, Associate Professor of Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon University
People are exposed to thousands of synthetic chemicals every day, but the health risks those chemicals pose are poorly understood. I was a co-investigator on a US $1.5 million grant from the EPA to develop machine-learning techniques for rapid chemical safety assessment. My lab was two months into our project when it was terminated in May because it no longer aligned with agency priorities, despite the administration’s Make America Healthy Again report specifically highlighting using AI to rapidly assess childhood chemical exposures as a focus area.
Get the world’s most fascinating discoveries delivered straight to your inbox.
Labs like mine are usually pipelines for early-career scientists to enter federal research labs, but the uncertain future of federal research agencies has disrupted this process. I’m seeing recent graduates lose federal jobs, and countless opportunities disappear. Students who would have been the next generation of scientists helping to shape environmental regulations to protect Americans have had their careers altered forever.
Many researchers are working to advocate for science in the public sphere. (Image credit: John McDonnell/AP Photo)
I’ve been splitting my time between research, teaching and advocating for academic freedom and the economic importanceof science funding because I care deeply about the scientific and academic excellence of this country and its effects on the world. I owe it to my students and the next generation to make sure people know what’s at stake.
Fewer people trained to treat addiction
Cara Poland, Associate Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Michigan State University
This work is personal: My brother died from substance use disorder. Behind every statistic is a family like mine, hoping for care that could save their loved one’s life.
With our federal funding cut by 60%, my team and I are unable to continue developing our addiction medicine curriculum and enrolling medical schools and clinicians into our program.
Brian G. Henning, Professor of Philosophy and Environmental Studies and Sciences, Gonzaga University
In 2021, a heat dome settled over the Northwest, shattering temperature records and claiming lives. Since that devastating summer, my team and I have been working with the City of Spokane to prepare for the climate challenges ahead.
We and the city were awarded a $19.9 million grant from the EPA to support projects that reduce pollution, increase community climate resilience and build capacity to address environmental and climate justice challenges.
Cooling centers are becoming more critical as extreme heat becomes more common. (Image credit: Getty Images)
As our work was about to begin, the Trump administration rescinded our funding in May. As a result, the five public facilities that were set to serve as hubs for community members to gather during extreme weather will be less equipped to handle power failures. Around 300 low-income households will miss out on efficient HVAC system updates. And our local economy will lose the jobs and investments these projects would have generated.
Despite this setback, the work will continue. My team and I care about our neighbors, and we remain focused on helping our community become more resilient to extreme heat and wildfires. This includes pursuing new funding to support this work. It will be smaller, slower and with fewer resources than planned, but we are not deterred.
LGBTQ+ people made invisible
Nathaniel M. Tran, Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Administration, University of Illinois Chicago
But instead of becoming demoralized, I grew emboldened: I will not be erased, and I will not let the LGBTQ+ community be erased. These setbacks renewed my commitment to advancing the public’s health, guided by rigorous science, collaboration and equity.
Rachael Sirianni, Professor of Neurological Surgery, UMass Chan Medical School
My lab designs new cancer treatments. We are one of only a few groups in the nation focused on treating pediatric cancer that has spread across the brain and spinal cord. This research is being crushed by the broad, destabilizing impacts of federal cuts to the NIH.
Compared to last year, I am working with around 25% of our funding and less than 50% of our staff. We cannot finish our studies, publish results or pursue new ideas. We have lost technology in development. Students andcolleagues are leaving as training opportunities and hope for the future of science dries up.
I’m faced with impossible questions about what to do next. Do I use my dwindling research funds to maintain personnel who took years to train? Keep equipment running? Bet it all on one final, risky study? There are simply no good choices remaining.
Inequality in science festers
Stephanie Nawyn, Associate Professor of Sociology, Michigan State University
Many people have asked me how the termination of my National Science Foundation grant to improve work cultures in university departments has affected me, but I believe that is the wrong question. Certainly it has meant the loss of publications, summer funding for faculty and graduate students, and opportunities to make working conditions at my and my colleagues’ institutions more equitable and inclusive.
