The Trump administration’s ongoing war on science is having very real consequences for Canadian researchers and scientists. Here’s a high-level overview of what’s happened over the month of September.
Funding Cuts
Growing Political Control over Research Funding
One of the most significant developments came with the Trump administration’s announcement that political appointees, and not scientists, will have the final say in who gets grant funding from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH).
This move builds on Trump’s previous executive order, which directed political appointees to cancel any federal grant if it is “not consistent with agency priorities” – effectively tying all future research to political and partisan objectives. These funding cuts will be more easily made by Trump appointees, as last month NIH Director Bhattacharya issued an internal memo officially empowering political priorities to override the NIH’s previous panel review scoring system (previously made by external, non-partisan experts).
With an impending review of research funding at NIH looming, this policy promises to further tighten research funding options for thousands of Canadians.
Using AI to Map Impact of Funding Cuts
According to a new study in the Journal of Nature, researchers demonstrated the future impacts of NIH cuts using predictive machine learning tools. The findings show that future cuts will undermine critical research in entire fields of study, including public health and cancer research, as well as preventing major scientific breakthroughs and advancements (e.g. cancer-screening techniques).
Muzzling Scientists
New Hush Order
New moves at the EPA this past September sparked concerns over how climate scientists are being increasingly muzzled in America. On September 20, political appointees at the EPA ordered scientists from its Office of Water to immediately pause all efforts to publish research, as they will now be “subject to a new review process”. Staffers said they were not given a reason as to why their papers were halted, and no details have since been made on this new review process, raising fears of increased muzzling of scientific voices.
Zeldin’s “Day One”
Speaking in an internal memo to all staff, Trump-appointed EPA Director Lee Zeldin announced an impending six-month agency-wide review, followed by a rapid restructuring of the agency, including placing its key research office directly under his personal oversight. Zeldin dubbed the announcement “day one of the new EPA”, indicating that the newly created Office of Finance and Administration would oversee these changes.
Suppression of Evidence
Kennedy’s Anti-Vaxx Agenda
September marked a serious uptick in evidence suppression by the Trump administration. In early September, US Health Secretary Kennedy added another five anti-vaccine advisors to his vaccine advisory committee (ACIP), and promptly directed ACIP to initiate a review of COVID-19, hepatitis B, and other politically-targeted vaccines. It took the committee just 11 days to ultimately reach their firm decision to no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccinations to the American public – a move widely criticized for being politically-driven by Kennedy himself.
Trump Pushing False Narratives
Another startling attack on evidence came on 22 September, where US President Trump (and later US Health Secretary Kennedy) made the claim that Tylenol was allegedly linked with causing autism. Just four days later, the Trump administration greenlit a new funding package for autism research to investigate the “causes” of autism. This announcement comes at a strange time, with the Trump administration approving politically-favourable research while simultaneously slashing billions from foreign aid, climate research, and other critical fields of study.
EPA Eliminating Emissions Tracking
Lastly, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a bombshell announcement: as of September, it would no longer collect emissions data from US polluters. This move comes amidst former fossil fuel executive and Trump appointed EPA Director Lee Zeldin’s attempts to undermine the groundbreaking 2009 finding on greenhouse gas emissions, essentially the cornerstone of all US emissions regulations and monitoring activities.
Policy Reversals and Pushback
Wins for Higher Education
However, there were some notable positive cases of pushback against Trump attacks on science. Regarding attacks on higher education, Harvard won its first legal battle against the Trump administration, and a US District Judge ordered the Trump administration to restore $500 million USD in cut funding to UCLA.
Institutional Pushback
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a scathing report denouncing the Trump administration for harming US public health through its attempts to undermine climate change regulations, reiterating the importance of protecting the landmark 2009 finding on greenhouse gas emissions. In September, a new cross-sector coalition issued an open letter calling on the US government to safeguard science funding. Lastly, in anticipation of the impending Budget deadline of 1 Oct, NIH staff successfully allocated their full funding allotment to crucial research projects on cancer research, vaccine development initiatives, and others.
Trump Administration on the Backfoot
In September, the Trump administration experienced several embarrassing incidents, leading to their decision to disband their controversial climate panel, publicly commit to defend Biden-era rule to force polluters to pay for “Forever Chemical” cleanups.
What Can Be Done?
All these attacks on science and research in the US have far-reaching implications in Canada – from direct funding cuts to researchers, to data suppression and politicization of research topics.
The federal budget is set to drop soon on November 4, promising to showcase the Liberal government’s priorities for the coming year in response to what is happening south of the border. It is paramount that historic investments in research from Budget 2024 be protected from the upcoming spending cuts. Science needs to be a priority in Canada, including the reinstatement of a Minister of Science, and the permanent legislative establishment of the Chief Science Advisor.
