ERROR 1
ERROR 1
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
Password and Confirm password must match.
If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)
ERROR 2
ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.
Scientists are on edge following the Jan. 22 cancellation of multiple meetings with the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). There’s no tally of how many meetings were cancelled, but some included NIH study sections and advisory councils, which review grant and fellowship applications.
Chrystal Starbird, a professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, received an email stating that her study section, which was scheduled for the following week, would be canceled. The email from the federal health agency was vague and didn’t provide any reason for the cancellation, she says.
Meanwhile, Rebecca Pompano, a professor of chemistry and bioengineering at the University of Virginia, was supposed to attend a training session that day for an upcoming study section. The training session was canceled 20 min before it was set to start.
The cancellations came a day after the new administration of President Donald J. Trump put a temporary external communications freeze on all federal health agencies, though it’s not clear if the two are related. “It’s very concerning that everything has been stopped for review, which hasn’t happened in prior presidential transitions,” Pompano says. “It tells you there’s some major changes happening.”
It’s also unclear when the NIH will start rescheduling the meetings. The agency has not yet responded to C&EN’s request for comment. According to Starbird, rescheduling will pose a challenge. “The meeting that I was supposed to attend next week, rescheduling that will likely take months,” she says.
And even if the meetings get back on track quickly, the distribution of grants could be delayed by 3 to 6 months, Pompano says. In her experience, a 3-month funding interruption could determine whether or not she can afford to keep research staff and trainees.
One professor of chemistry at a large state university, who asked to remain anonymous due to their early-career status, says they were immediately concerned when they heard news of the meeting cancellations and communications freeze. They were on the verge of accessing NIH grant money that would help support students working in their lab.
All the professor needed was for the agency to send over a notice of award, which would permit them to request funds from the agency. “I wouldn’t have taken two students this year if I didn’t have this funding coming in,” they say.
To the professor’s relief, the notice wasn’t affected by the meeting cancellations. They received it the next day.
However, Starbird, who received her own award notice last week, isn’t confident that the award document will guarantee that funds are distributed in a timely fashion. “We don’t have any information. That’s the problem,” she says. “I think what’s most alarming to people is the uncertainty.”
Nick Chiappini, a chemistry professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, doesn’t currently have an NIH grant under consideration, but he knows how important they are for researchers. “NIH grants are one of the main funding streams available to me as an organic chemistry researcher,” he says. “If I had a grant under consideration right now, I would be apoplectic.”
Chiappini says he’s contacted his senators about the situation and suggests other researchers do the same.
Beyond the meeting cancellations and communications freeze, Pompano is worried about what the future holds for the NIH. She notes that Jay Bhattacharya, who Trump nominated to lead the agency, is reportedly considering restricting which universities would be allowed to receive grants based on free speech and academic freedom ratings. “There’s apparently an intention to really overhaul a lot” of the agency, Pompano says.
Dominique Baker, a professor at the University of Delaware who studies higher education policy, says that, at the very least, researchers should expect to see changes to how NIH grants are solicited and evaluated.
Baker also expects that scientists will experience similar interruptions in the grant funding process at other federal agencies. In fact, a Jan. 20 Department of Energy memo suggests that researchers funded through that agency will see delays in funding decisions and awards.
“Just because the focus is on NIH right now does not mean that the focus will stay on NIH,” Baker says.
Join the conversation
Contact the reporter
Submit a Letter to the Editor for publication
Engage with us on X