The Impact of DOGE’s Funding Cuts on Biomedical Research, From the Point of View of Former NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli

Headline
The impact of DOGE’s funding cuts on biomedical research, from the point of view of former NIH director Monica Bertagnolli
Pubdate
One-liner
"Fear can really cause some very harmful effects."
Timeline
Document Type
Report Excerpt

It can be argued that it’s largely because of this 138-year-old government agency [the National Institutes of Health]—a part of the US Department of Health and Human Services—that the human genetic code was deciphered, AIDS was isolated, hepatitis C discovered, and where the basic research that lead to the COVID-19 vaccines was done. At least 171 scientists who have received Nobel Prizes have either conducted research at the NIH or been supported by NIH funding; the NIH pays the bills for the large clinical trials in heart disease, diabetes, cancer, chronic diseases, and many other fields that inform so much of health care today.

But the NIH is now facing cuts of 35 percent, requested by billionaire Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).[1] Consequently, researchers have had to struggle with getting reimbursed for routine expenses such as lab mice—especially after DOGE put a one-dollar spending limit on the use of government credit cards. Years of work have been put at risk.[2]

* * *

Interview with Monica Bertagnolli.

* * *

Bertagnolli: I think it’s very unfortunate that the value of science has been undermined by the rhetoric that we have seen.

While I believe it’s perfectly fine to challenge science and to demand that it be the best it can possibly be, I don’t think it’s appropriate to undermine the ability of the entire process—that only produces fear.

And fear can really cause some very harmful effects.

Drollette: Give me an example.

Bertagnolli: One of the most difficult and troublesome is something that we see in medicine: The people who have the most distrust in science are also the segment of our society who seem to be doing the worst.

What that says to me is two things. First—we have to do better for that segment of society. You know, forget what they believe right now; we have to find ways within their belief system to do better for them. These people are experiencing some of the worst outcomes across the nation, and by doing better for them—by showing that science can actually help them be healthier and live longer—then we’re in [sic] their trust.

Second—you can’t demand trust of anybody, you have to earn it. And I think the particular people who have the lowest trust in science are the ones where we have to work the hardest.

Kicker