0:00
/
0:00
Transcript

Special Guests:

Lisa Marceau-LinkedIn

Matt Golden - LinkedIn

On January 27th around 10:30 pm, NIH grant awardees were no longer able to access the government platform or receive funds. Please track below the massiveness and the size and scope of NIH funds. This conversation is from the perspective of two small business owners, NIH awardees: Lisa Marceua & Matt Golden.

We appreciate your willingness to come on the record and share your experience. Others awardees as well as NIH staff have communicated off the record that this happen without any communication, and all funding froze just like that.

General Background to NIH Funding

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) receives an annual budget of approximately $47 billion[1][6]. In fiscal year 2023, NIH funding generated an estimated $92.89 billion in economic activity, with every $1 of NIH funding generating approximately $2.46 of economic activity[6]. NIH Funding Allocation

NIH funds a wide range of biomedical and behavioral research:

In FY 2023, NIH awarded over 60,000 grants supporting more than 300,000 researchers at over 2,500 institutions[6].

Specific research areas receiving increased funding in FY 2024 include Alzheimer's disease, related dementias, and mental health[7].

The FY 2023 budget included $19.761 billion for R01-equivalent grants, which are the primary funding mechanism for investigator-initiated research[2].

Impact of this Policy

These actions have raised concerns in the scientific community:

A temporary freeze on travel, meetings, communications, and hiring at NIH has been implemented[9].

Key meetings for determining research project funding have been canceled[9].

Scientists worry that these disruptions could stall billions of dollars in NIH-funded projects at universities[9].

While some experts view this pause as typical during a new administration's transition, others see it as part of a larger pattern of undermining scientific findings, particularly given the president's past statements on COVID-19 and climate change[9].

The long-term impact of these policies remains uncertain, but there are concerns about potential loss of scientific capacity and disruption to ongoing research projects[9].

Citations:

[1] https://www.science.org/content/article/final-nih-budget-2024-essentially-flat

[2] https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2024/02/21/fy-2023-by-the-numbers-extramural-grant-investments-in-research/

[3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5468112/

[4] https://www.science.org/content/article/senate-panel-approves-2-bump-nih-budget-2024

[5] https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2023/03/01/fy-2022-by-the-numbers-extramural-grant-investments-in-research/

[6] https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/impact-nih-research/serving-society/direct-economic-contributions

[7] https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R43341.pdf

[8] https://report.nih.gov/funding/categorical-spending

[9] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/science-research-policy/2025/01/24/scientists-worried-after-trump-halts-nih-grant

Trump's proposed budget cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) faced severe criticism from various sectors, including scientists, physicians, and politicians from both parties. The main criticisms were:

1. Devastating impact on research: The proposed 18% cut ($5.8 billion) to NIH's budget would severely limit the agency's ability to fund new research grants and ongoing projects[1][2]. This reduction could stall billions of dollars in NIH-funded projects at universities across the country.

2. Threat to public health: Critics argued that the cuts would lead to an increase in illness and deaths by reducing funding for programs that protect Americans from conditions such as diabetes, heart attacks, and strokes[1].

3. Undermining scientific innovation: The budget cuts were seen as hostile to scientific innovation, potentially discouraging students from pursuing or completing STEM degrees and driving researchers to seek opportunities overseas[2].

4. Disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations: The proposed cuts to Medicaid, in addition to NIH budget reductions, were criticized as cruel and potentially devastating to elderly, disabled, and low-income adults and their children[1].

5. Disruption of the research ecosystem: The cuts were seen as a threat to the entire biomedical research ecosystem in the United States, potentially compromising the country's position as a global leader in scientific research[2].

6. Counterproductive to recent trends: The proposed cuts contradicted recent bipartisan efforts to increase NIH funding, which had seen a $2 billion boost in 2015[2].

Many critics, including some Republicans, described the proposed cuts as "draconian," "immoral," and "stunning in cruelty," arguing that they would cause enormous pain to the most vulnerable Americans and should be rejected by Congress[1].

Citations:

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5468112/

[2] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/20/science-advocates-dismayed-size-cuts-proposed-nih-and-other-agencies

[3] https://www.npr.org/transcripts/nx-s1-5183014

[4] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00231-y

[5] https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-s-new-budget-cuts-all-favored-few-science-programs

[6] https://www.propublica.org/article/nih-niaid-trump-kennedy-bhattacharya-vaccines-research

[7] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/national-institutes-of-health-budget-trump.html

Find us & follow us:

Michael Mann's LinkedIn

Follow us on YouTube

TikTok

Instagram

Twitter / X

Apple

Spotify

😍 💕 🌍 💜 😊 🚀Most important thing is to subscribe to keep updated with our latest podcasts, newsletters...etc.

Planetary Health First Mars Next is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Planetary Health First Mars Next is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

We might just lift off to Mars if the orbit is right! 😍 💕 🌍 💜 😊 🚀

  • In love & kindness,

  • Michael Mann, (😍 💕)

Disclaimer: the views of the participants are their own only and do not reflect the views of other participants, participants' organizations, etc or Planetary Health First Mars Next or the Host…….

This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be considered professional or medical advice.

In addition if there are any mistakes or facts that need to be corrected please feel free to reach out to us so we can correct any statement.

Understand we are a self published entity and do the best we can.

If you have an idea or have an inspiring topic or know anyone that would be a great guest for our show please reach out to info@planetaryhealthfirstmarsnext.org