The Trump administration has proposed and implemented substantial cuts to scientific research funding, which are expected to impact scientific progress profoundly. The administration has proposed significant reductions in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, mainly targeting indirect costs that support research infrastructure. These cuts will most likely include a drastic reduction in funding for research institutions, potentially stalling or halting ongoing research projects, a cap on indirect costs at 15%, down from current rates as high as 61% at some institutions, and billions of dollars in funding reductions for research institutions.

The administration’s cost-cutting measures extend beyond the NIH and affect various scientific research programs, including freezing federal grants and reduced funding for scientific research. Executive orders have also led to the termination of grants and freezing of funds for diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, “gender ideology” and green energy projects, as well as significant uncertainty for researchers relying on federal funding.

The proposed cuts and policy changes are expected to affect research institutions and ongoing scientific projects severely. For example, the reductions immediately strained research institutes’ finances. Duke University received $580 million in NIH grants in the previous fiscal year and is preparing for substantial financial losses. Institutions have implemented hiring freezes and scaled back research activities to combat these losses.

Certain areas of scientific research are particularly at risk. These include biomedical research, clinical trials and large-scale scientific studies that rely heavily on federal funding for indirect costs; programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion within scientific research; and climate change research and international collaborations on climate science.

The administration’s policies may have lasting impacts on research institutions. For instance, financial uncertainty has created challenges in planning and executing long-term research projects.

The scientific community has expressed significant alarm and concern over the potential impacts of these cuts. Scientists and researchers have mobilized in response to the funding cuts by staging rallies and protests across the United States and Europe to defend scientific research and secure funding. Also, organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists have warned of an “all-out war on science and scientists.”

The administration’s approach to science policy has raised concerns about undermining scientific integrity, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and about potential censorship and self-censorship among scientists.

The administration’s policies may affect America’s role in global scientific collaboration. Withdrawal from international agreements and funding cuts for climate-change projects have raised concerns about our participation in global scientific efforts.

The uncertainty and potential cuts may lead to the loss of scientific talent as researchers seek more stable funding environments.

If implemented, these cuts and policy changes could also significantly impact scientific progress in the United States. Cuts to essential research funding could slow scientific discoveries and technological innovations, and the United States may lose its position as a global leader in scientific research and development.

Reduced scientific progress could hurt the U.S. economy, particularly in sectors that rely on scientific and technological advancements. Cuts to biomedical research could slow progress in developing new treatments and understanding diseases. Reduced funding for climate science and environmental research could hinder efforts to address climate change and other environmental challenges.

Although the courts have temporarily blocked some of the administration’s efforts, if allowed to proceed, the proposed cuts and policy changes significantly threaten scientific progress in the United States.

The potential impacts range from immediate financial strain on research institutions to long-term consequences for the country’s scientific leadership and innovation capacity.

The scientific community’s strong opposition and calls for action highlight the severity of these potential cuts and their implications for the future of science in America.

On March 31, nearly 2,000 doctors, scientists, and researchers published an open letter warning about the administration’s actions. Their letter emphasized threats to the country’s health, economic development, national security and scientific preeminence. They called on the Trump administration to halt this “wholesale assault on U.S. science.”

Scientific research is crucial to society because it drives advancements in health care, technology, economic growth and social development. It provides us with the tools to tackle global challenges, ranging from climate change to food security. Historically, it has been the catalyst for transformative discoveries that have enhanced the human condition. By nurturing a culture of scientific inquiry and investing in research, societies can continue to innovate, grow and address the complex issues of our time. Suppressing scientific inquiry impedes societal and technological progress.

A.J. Russo (dr.a.j.russo@gmail.com) is a retired biology professor from Mount St. Mary’s University in Emmitsburg, Maryland, and has also taught at Drew University and Hartwick College. He is the research director of the Mensah Medical Research Institute in Warrenville, Illinois.