Hundreds
of
workers
at
the
National
Institutes
of
Health
on
Monday
openly
protested
the
Trump
administration’s
cuts
to
the
agency
and
consequences
for
human
lives,
writing
in
a
sharply
worded
letter
that
its
actions
are
causing
“a
dramatic
reduction
in
life-saving
research.”
In
a
June
9
letter
to
NIH
Director
Jay
Bhattacharya,
NIH
workers
said
they
felt
“compelled
to
speak
up
when
our
leadership
prioritizes
political
momentum
over
human
safety
and
faithful
stewardship
of
public
resources.”
“For
staff
across
the
National
Institutes
of
Health
(NIH),
we
dissent
to
Administration
policies
that
undermine
the
NIH
mission,
waste
public
resources,
and
harm
the
health
of
Americans
and
people
across
the
globe,”
they
said.
The
letter
is
an
extraordinary
rebuke
of
the
Trump
administration’s
actions
against
the
NIH,
which
include:
terminating
hundreds
of
grants
funding
scientific
and
biomedical
research;
firing
more
than
1,000
employees
this
year;
and
moving
to
end
billions
in
funds
to
partner
institutions
overseas,
a
move
current
and
former
NIH
workers
say
will
harm
research
on
rare
cancers
and
infectious
diseases,
as
well
as
research
that
aims
to
minimize
tobacco
use
and
related
chronic
illnesses,
among
other
areas.
Some
NIH
workers
signed
their
names
publicly,
openly
daring
to
challenge
a
president
who
has
sought
to
purge the
government
of
employees
he
views
as
disloyal
to
him.
Others
signed
anonymously.
“It’s
about
the
harm
that
these
policies
are
having
on
research
participants
and
American
public
health,
and
global
public
health,”
said
Jenna
Norton,
who
works
at
the
National
Institute
of
Diabetes
and
Digestive
and
Kidney
Diseases,
one
of
NIH’s
27
institutes.
“There
are
research
participants
who
generously
decide
to
donate
their
time
and
literal
pieces
of
their
body,
with
the
understanding
that
that
service
is
going
to
help
advance
research
for
diseases
that
they
are
living
with
and
help
the
next
person
who
comes
along
with
that
disease.”
“These
policies
are
preventing
us
from
delivering
on
the
promise
we
made
to
them
and
honoring
the
commitment
that
they
made,
and
putting
them
at
risk,”
she
said.
The
workers
wrote
that
they
hope
Bhattacharya
welcomes
their
criticisms
given
his
vows
to
prioritize
“academic
freedom”
and
to
respect
dissenting
views
as
leader
of
the
NIH,
which
is
based
in
Bethesda,
Maryland.
Its
authors
called
it
the
“Bethesda
Declaration”
—
a
play
on
the
controversial
“Great
Barrington
Declaration”
that
Bhattacharya
co-authored
during
the
covid-19
pandemic.
Bhattacharya’s
declaration
advocated
against
lockdown
measures
and
proposed
that
widespread
immunity
against
covid
could
be
achieved
by
allowing
healthy
people
to
get
infected
with
the
virus
and
instituting
protective
measures
only
for
medically
vulnerable
people.
It
was
criticized
at
the
time
by
Francis
Collins,
then-director
of
the
NIH,
who
called
Bhattacharya
and
his
co-authors
“fringe
epidemiologists,”
according
to
emails
the
American
Institute
for
Economic
Research
obtained
through
a
Freedom
of
Information
Act
request.
In
their
letter,
NIH
workers
demanded
that
Bhattacharya
restore
grants
that
were
“delayed
or
terminated
for
political
reasons.”
Those
grants
funded
a
range
of
projects,
including
those
addressing
Alzheimer’s
disease,
ways
to
boost
vaccination
rates,
and
efforts
to
combat
health
disparities
or
health
misinformation.
“Academic
freedom
should
not
be
applied
selectively
based
on
political
ideology.
To
achieve
political
aims,
NIH
has
targeted
multiple
universities
with
indiscriminate
grant
terminations,
payment
freezes
for
ongoing
research,
and
blanket
holds
on
awards
regardless
of
the
quality,
progress,
or
impact
of
the
science,”
the
NIH
workers
wrote.
The
funding
terminations,
they
said,
“throw
away
years
of
hard
work
and
millions
of
dollars,”
“risk
participant
health,”
and
“damage
hard-earned
public
trust,
counter
to
your
stated
goal
to
improve
trust
in
NIH.”
In
an
emailed
comment,
Bhattacharya
said,
“The
Bethesda
Declaration
has
some
fundamental
misconceptions
about
the
policy
directions
the
NIH
has
taken
in
recent
months,
including
the
continuing
support
of
the
NIH
for
international
collaboration.
Nevertheless,
respectful
dissent
in
science
is
productive.
We
all
want
the
NIH
to
succeed.”
The
NIH’s
nearly
$48
billion
budget
makes
it
the
world’s
largest
public
funder
of
scientific
research.
Its
work
has
led
to
countless
scientific
discoveries
that
have
helped
improve
health
and
save
lives
around
the
globe.
But
it
hasn’t
been
without
controversies,
including
instances
of
research
misconduct
and
not
effectively
monitoring
grant
awards
and
the
related
research.
Researchers
and
some
states
have
sued
NIH
and
HHS
over
the
grant
cuts.
An
April
3
deposition
by
NIH
official
Michelle
Bulls
said
Rachel
Riley,
a
senior
adviser
at
HHS
who
is
part
of
the
Department
of
Government
Efficiency
created
by
executive
order,
provided
NIH
officials
lists
of
grants
to
terminate
and
language
for
termination
notices.
Elon
Musk,
the
world’s
richest
person,
led
DOGE
through
May.
Norton
has
worked
at
the
NIH
as
a
federal
employee
or
contractor
for
about
a
decade.
She
said
the
current
administration’s
policies
are
“definitely
unethical
and
very
likely
illegal,”
listing
a
string
of
developments
in
recent
months.
They
include
terminating
studies
early
and
putting
participating
patients
at
risk
because
they
have
had
to
abruptly
stop
taking
medications,
and
holding
up
research
that
would
predominantly
or
exclusively
recruit
participants
from
minority
races
and
ethnicities,
who
have
historically
been
underrepresented
in
medical
research.
“They’re
saying
that
doing
studies
exclusively
on
Black
Americans
to
try
to
develop
interventions
that
work
for
that
population,
or
interventions
that
are
culturally
tailored
to
Hispanic-Latino
populations
—
that
that
kind
of
research
can’t
go
forward
is
extremely
problematic,”
Norton
said.
“And,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
studies
that
over-recruit
from
white
people
have
been
allowed
to
go
forward.”
The
NIH
workers
also
demanded
that
Bhattacharya
reinstate
workers
who
were
dismissed
under
recent
mass
firings
and
allow
research
that
is
done
in
partnership
with
institutions
in
foreign
countries
“to
continue
without
disruption.”
The
NIH
works
with
organizations
around
the
globe
to
combat
major
public
health
issues,
including
types
of
cancer,
tobacco-related
illnesses,
and
HIV.
In
addition
to
the
firing
of
probationary
workers,
NIH
fired
1,200
civil
servants
as
part
of
a
rapid
“reduction
in
force”
at
federal
health
agencies.
During
a
May
19
town
hall
meeting
with
NIH
staff,
a
recording
of
which
was
obtained
by
KFF
Health
News,
Bhattacharya
said
the
decisions
about
RIFs
“happened
before
I
got
here.
I
actually
don’t
have
any
transparency
into
how
those
decisions
were
made.”
He
started
at
NIH
on
April
1,
the
day
many
workers
at
NIH
and
other
agencies
were
told
they
were
fired.
Other
workers
have
been
fired
since
Bhattacharya
took
the
helm
—
nearly
all
the
National
Cancer
Institute’s
communications
staff
were
fired
in
early
May,
three
former
employees
told
KFF
Health
News.
The
letter
is
the
latest
salvo
in
a
growing
movement
by
scientists
and
others
against
the
Trump
administration’s
actions.
In
addition
to
in-person
protests
outside
HHS
headquarters
and
elsewhere,
some
former
employees
are
organizing
patients
to
get
involved.
Peter
Garrett,
who
led
the
National
Cancer
Institute’s
communications
work,
has
created
an
advocacy
nonprofit
called
Patient
Action
for
Cancer
Research.
The
aim
is
to
engage
patients
“in
the
conversation
and
federal
funding
and
science
policymaking,”
he
said
in
an
interview.
His
group
aims
to
get
patients
and
their
relatives
to
speak
out
about
how
federal
cancer
research
affects
them
directly,
he
said
—
a
“guerrilla
lobbying”
effort
to
put
the
issue
squarely
before
members
of
Congress.
Garrett
said
he
retired
early
from
the
cancer
institute
because
of
concerns
about
political
interference.
Career
officials
routinely
work
under
both
Republican
and
Democratic
presidents.
It
is
par
for
the
course
for
their
priorities
and
assignments
to
evolve
when
a
new
president,
Cabinet
secretaries,
and
other
political
appointees
take
over.
Usually,
those
changes
occur
without
much
protest.
This
time,
workers
said
the
upheaval
and
harm
done
to
the
NIH
is
so
extensive
that
they
felt
they
had
no
choice
but
to
protest.
In
11
years
at
NIH,
Norton
said,
“I’ve
never
seen
anything
that
comes
anywhere
near
this.”
In
the
June
9
letter,
the
workers
said,
“Many
have
raised
these
concerns
to
NIH
leadership,
yet
we
remain
pressured
to
implement
harmful
measures.”
“It’s
not
about
our
jobs,”
said
one
NIH
worker
who
signed
the
letter
anonymously.
“It
is
about
humanity.
It
is
about
the
future.”
Senior
correspondent
Arthur
Allen
contributed
to
this
report.
KFF
Health
News
is
a
national
newsroom
that
produces
in-depth
journalism
about
health
issues
and
is
one
of
the
core
operating
programs
at
KFF—an
independent
source
of
health
policy
research,
polling,
and
journalism.
Learn
more
about
KFF.
Photo:
FilippoBacci,
Getty
Images
Kathryn
