Fact, fiction and future for U.S. scientific and medical research

Billions in potential cuts to the National Institutes of Health could dramatically reshape the future of American science. The Trump administration’s latest budget proposal calls for a 10% reduction in funding to NIH funding and additional cuts to other science agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency and NASA. Congress ultimately beat back steeper proposed cuts to NIH last year and appears poised to do so again, but the science reductions that have gone through have left many doctors and researchers reeling. Labs have tightened budgets, clinical trials are being scaled back or delayed, and a generation of young scientists faces an increasingly uncertain future. The Trump administration has specifically targeted initiatives it sees as political, including researching health outcomes for women and minorities, as well as climate change and mRNA vaccines. Amid other priority shifts, experts worry there could be ripple effects that stall progress on cancer, Alzheimer’s and other rare diseases. This isn’t a typical partisan fight. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have raised alarms about what’s at stake, framing NIH funding as essential to public health, economic growth, and America’s global leadership in science. So why are cuts still on the table and where will the impact hit hardest?  On this episode of Studio 2, the fight over health, science and our country’s global edge.  Guests:  — Max Kozlov, science journalist at Nature — Allie Sinclair, Joan Bossert Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania and an incoming Assistant Professor of psychological sciences at Rice University