Mother Jones illustration; Christopher Burns; Braňo/Unsplash (2)
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) plans to end future funding for research projects focused on vaccine hesitancy and the Covid pandemic, as well as gender-affirming care, climate change, and diversity, equity, and inclusion, among other areas, according to a new draft guidance memo reviewed by Mother Jones.
The internal memo, which has not been finalized, is essentially a how-to document for staff at the NIH on how they should end grants deemed inappropriate by the administration. It includes required template language “provided to NIH” from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), led by Robert F Kennedy Jr., to describe “research activities that NIH no longer supports.” These include:
Vaccine hesitancy. “It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize research activities that focuses [sic] gaining scientific knowledge on why individuals are hesitant to be vaccinated and/or explore ways to improve vaccine interest and commitment,” the memo states, instructing staffers to tell grantees that the “NIH is obligated to carefully steward grant awards to ensure taxpayer dollars are used in ways that benefit the American people and improve their quality of life. Your project does not satisfy these criteria.” (RFK Jr.’s anti-vaccine views have been well-documented. It’s unclear whether he played a role in this specific choice of words.)
The Covid pandemic. “Now that the pandemic is over,” the memo asserts, grant funds intended to “ameliorate the effects of the pandemic” are “no longer necessary.” Later, in a section of the memo labeled “Frequently Asked Questions,” officials write that projects related to the “general biology” of the coronavirus, or things like long Covid, can continue for now. (Although deaths have gone down since the start of the pandemic, hundreds of people still die every week from Covid in the United States.)
DEI. These are described as “research programs based primarily on artificial and non-scientific categories, including amorphous equity objectives.” The programs, the memo reads, “are antithetical to the scientific inquiry, do nothing to expand our knowledge of living systems, provide low returns on investment, and ultimately do not enhance health, lengthen life, or reduce illness.” (As my colleague Henry Carnell and I previously reported, research shows DEI programs can enhance innovation and productivity.)
Gender-affirming care. “Research programs based on gender identity are often unscientific, have little identifiable return on investment, and do nothing to enhance the health of many Americans,” the memo says. “Many such studies ignore, rather than seriously examine, biological realities.” (According to HHS back in 2023, however, before Trump took office, “Research demonstrates that gender-affirming care improves the mental health and overall well-being of gender diverse children and adolescents” and “has been shown to increase positive outcomes.”)
Funds that support researchers in China. “Bolstering Chinese universities does not enhance the American people’s quality of life or improve America’s position in the world,” the memo reads. “On the contrary, funding research in China contravenes American national-security interests and hinders America’s foreign-policy objectives.”
Climate change. This topic, “particularly in the area of health effects of climate change,” is no longer “consistent with HHS/NIH priorities,” according to the memo. (I recently reported on what it’d mean to cut research on the health effects of climate change; ultimately it would be “detrimental” to our well-being, said Columbia University environmental health professor Marianthi-Anna Kioumourtzoglou when I followed up with her this week.)
“Research related to attempts to influence the public’s opinion.” This vague category of research had no other details or explanation.
If you’ve been following the news, much of this guidance likely won’t come as a shock. DEI and climate change research have been on the chopping block since the first days of the new administration. And, as Science and the Washington Post reported in March, the NIH has already moved to cut funding for dozens of ongoing studies on vaccine hesitancy, with language similar to what appeared in the memo reviewed by Mother Jones. Similarly, as Nature reported, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and NIH plan to cancel billions in funding related to the Covid pandemic.
“When you look at the programs in which they’ve disinvested, it’s clear they actually have no interest in being guided by evidence and scientific consensus.”
The latest leaked memo provides deeper insight into programs the administration apparently plans to axe, and more reasoning behind the research crackdown.
Trump’s science cuts, including the topic areas listed in the memo, are “like a random grab bag of issues,” says Darya Minovi, a senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “[RFK Jr.] claims that he values gold-standard science,” she says, “but when you look at the programs in which they’ve disinvested, it’s clear they actually have no interest in being guided by evidence and scientific consensus.”
In addition to outlining the agency’s research priorities (or at least the things it won’t be researching), the draft memo also describes how staff should approach funding determinations. For instance, if an NIH award recipient has received funds to attend a conference, but the conference has a session on DEI, the recipient can’t use NIH funds to attend. If a project includes non-priority activities, like DEI, in part, the project may still be viable, the memo reads, if those aims or activities are “negotiated out.” Overall, to avoid issuing awards that support these activities “in error,” the memo instructs NIH staff to “take care to completely excise” all inappropriate activities.
NIH and HHS did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Mother Jones.
