Trump's Budget Calls for $17 Billion Cut to NIH, Citing Lax Oversight of Gain-of-Function Research in Wuhan
The White House budget plan says the agency's failure to prove it was not complicit in a possible lab leak shows it's "too big and unfocused."

The White House budget calls for slashing $17 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), citing the agency's failure to properly monitor risky gain-of-function research it funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)—where the COVID-19 pandemic plausibly originated.
"While evidence of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic leaking from a laboratory is now confirmed by several intelligence agencies, the NIH's inability to prove that its grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology were not complicit in such a possible leak, or get data and hold recipients of Federal funding accountable is evidence that NIH has grown too big and unfocused," reads the budget summary released on Friday.
Shortly after President Donald Trump's inauguration, the CIA produced a new assessment saying that the agency now favors a lab leak explanation of the pandemic's origins.
The FBI and the Energy Department have also said they favor the lab leak theory, as does Germany's intelligence agency.
NIH has come under intense scrutiny for lax oversight of gain-of-function research it funded at the WIV via its grantee, the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance.
In the years preceding the pandemic, NIH continued funding EcoHealth's gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, despite White House policies either freezing funding for that type of work or requiring it to undergo more serious scrutiny. It also failed to follow up with EcoHealth when it missed a deadline to submit progress reports on its work at WIV on the eve of the pandemic.
Lab leak proponents point to this work, which involved creating viruses with enhanced potential to infect human cells, as likely seeding the creation of the pandemic at the WIV.
The Biden administration suspended EcoHealth Alliance, and its now-former president Peter Daszak from receiving federal funding in 2024, citing its lax oversight of its subgrantees in Wuhan.
In its last days in office, the Biden administration formally debarred EcoHealth and Daszak from receiving federal funds for the next five years.
Gain-of-function research on pandemic pathogens is a tiny portion of NIH's budget. EcoHealth's grant was just $3 million, and only a portion of that was spent on its controversial work at WIV.
Trump's proposed cuts to NIH are clearly part of a larger agenda to whittle the agency down in size. The budget document also criticizes NIH for funding "radical gender ideology."
White House budget documents are ultimately a political statement, and it's typical that few of the proposed cuts they include are passed by Congress.
It would be notable if Congress declined to take up Trump on his proposed NIH cuts, given the administration's lab leak justification for the cuts.
The final report from the Republican majority on the House subcommittee tasked with investigating the origins of COVID-19 concluded that the pandemic likely resulted from a lab incident.
It would be remarkable if, after coming to that conclusion, House Republicans continued to fund NIH at existing levels without additional oversight of gain-of-function research on pandemic pathogens.
The Trump administration is reportedly going to be issuing a freeze on federal gain-of-function research funding imminently. Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) also has reintroduced a bill to more tightly regulate funding of such research.
Paul's bill passed out of the Senate's Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee in the last Congress.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They should get zero.
We are already facing the potential for the worst brain drain any country has ever experienced since Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Disappearing NIH will basically end most of America's scientific research, and the scientists will be welcomed by other countries. The result will be that the other countries will clean our clocks economically for a century. But MAGA just wants all Americans to work in low wage factory and farm work.
I see no problem with occasionally reverting all spending like that to zero. If something needs research spending, then it can be justified from scratch in future years. Without getting into bureaucratic inertia and rent seeking and cronyism and entitlement mindsets
"Disappearing NIH will basically end most of America's scientific research..."
Yeah, I'm going to call bullshit on this one.
NIH = Noone Is Healthy
Don't worry. Harvard is training up the next generation of Lysenko based scientists as we speak.
Only 'Guns' (Gov-Guns) can do research! /s
Theft =/= Research.
If the Research has Value it will exist ... [Na]tional So[zi]alist fanboy self-projecting.
Absurd. The geographical data on the first to get covid, and the genetics makes a lab leak impossible. One would have to believe that covid magically get 9 miles from lab to wet market without infecting anyone. Then contaminated the wet market exactly like a natural animal-to-human transmission would look like.
Whoa, you're like 4 years behind in your research. It's all but certain it was a lab leak.
Molly is a dumbfuck.
Tony never did receive that "facts changed" memo.
Have you noticed that politicians and political organizations push lab leak, but scientists don't? Lab leak has nothing behind it but conspiracies, unanswered questions (which is somehow suspicious), and circumstantial inferences. Wet market has genetics, virology, and other sciences behind it.
Because the “scientists “ at are the dumbasses that did it?
First, a disclosure: I'm a medical research scientist.
Second: What would scientists know about it? It may well be a natural, unmodified virus, but the fact that it broke out in Wuhan...next to the Wuhan Corona virus research lab, the known evidence that some of the lab workers were ill makes it ridiculously unlikely it came from a bat or snake or whatever at the wet market.
I am also a medical research scientist. The genetic evidence is overwhelming that it was not bioengineered. It may have been a lab leak; I was never convinced that the lab leak theory was ever disproven. But it really doesn't matter whether it was a lab leak or a wet market; what mattered was that China was not open about what was going on -- and that Trump himself lied to the American people about what was going on (Bob Woodward got that admission on tape) while praising Xi for his handling of the pandemic -- in order to not endanger a trade deal that they had negotiated! Trump himself had removed almost all US scientific personnel from China -- see my other comment.
BTW here is the official Trump propaganda on that trade deal:
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/US-China-Agreement-Fact-Sheet.pdf
We will likely not know for generations what was actually going on in China in December through February 2019-2020. Xi and company suppressed everything.
But it really doesn't matter whether it was a lab leak or a wet market; what mattered was that China was not open about what was going on
Yes, this is the crux of the matter. I don't get why the MAGA-tards hop around like monkeys on this subject.
I know- Donnie looked bad. I don't care.
Hey Charlie. Has anything happened since 2019? Like the paper you linked being laughably shown to be false?
BTW you probably know already that NIH just imposed new rules that ban foreign subcontracts on grants.
https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/nih-update-policies-practices-guiding-subawards
It doesn't mean that there can't be collaborative research with other countries, although it would not be surprising were the Trump Administration to try to do that.
The bigger threat is the proposed $17 billion cut to NIH. That would basically mean no new research grants for two years or more. I may need to look for job opportunities elsewhere, and a number of countries are setting up programs to attract US scientists. Watch the brain drain.
Good luck to you. It's tough in the field right now. Right now my funding is mostly from collaborations with industry and philanthropy, but I see the effects of the cuts all around the university and a hiring freeze. The foreign post docs are scared shitless.
What remains to be seen is if pharma will build up their own research again if NIH grants are cut. I'd gladly move back to industry if I had the opportunity.
OMG! Your jobs might get outsourced overseas?
Welcome to the real world.
Eh, whaddayagunnado?
First they came for manufacturing jobs, and qb cheered.
Then they came for government subsidized jobs and qb cried.
There is no such thing as "government subsidized"...there is "taxpayer funded". This world play bs is how the far left cultists make things seem benign. Just like calling: Invaders as "Migrants".
"Eh, whaddayagunnado" is crying to Jesse. Can't you try to make your lies believable? You don't have the clout or charisma of your orange idol.
Crying...cheering...Neither is true.
And how is it you're so familiar with government contracts, Jesse?
Jesse wants to make manufacturing into government subsidized jobs while criticizing government subsidized research because it's about "who" with Jesse, not any principle.
And if the tariff plan wasn't destined to be an utter disaster at increasing government subsidized army of tiny screw drivers, I wouldn't fault the subsidized manufacturing workers, like I don’t criticize government workers or subsidized researchers. Because when the government interferes with the market, what choice to people have but to find employment within the market as it exists?
What work is there that's not manipulated one way or another, directly or indirectly by the massive federal government?
So Trump and Jesse want to use the massive federal government to return us to 1950 by gutting science and education and bringing back toaster making as we head in toward 2050. Great plan.
The gutting of science and education of the 50's got us to the moon in the 60's using computers less powerful than some new refrigerators. Now we regularly pump out degree holding college grads who can't comprehend anything more complicated than a Dick and Jane primer and don't understand how loans work.
I'm not sure I get your point. The US spent about $300 billion on the apollo program which was science and technology.
As far as the wasteful expensive college degrees and loan situation today, yeah that situation is bad.
That's not to say that science should be publicly funded, but neither should manufacturing.
Dumb and racist is no way to go through life Molly.
" the agency's failure to properly monitor risky gain-of-function research "
The US did have scientists based in China when Trump's first term began. But Trump himself removed all National Science Foundation personnel and all but 14 Centers for Disease Control personnel, all of whom were left in Beijing, over seven hundred miles from Wuhan.
"without additional oversight of gain-of-function research on pandemic pathogens."
I have personally pointed out when I review grant applications that it is next to impossible to adequately monitor research that is being done in totalitarian countries.
Why? Because a disease might break out in a “wet market”?
I've started to notice how many of the far leftists here have government resourced jobs. Strange.
seriously. it all makes sense now.
Congratulations, you two are just a hair away from realizing what you're advocating. Because this is exactly what your desired new class of government subsidized blue colar union members will be by the millions, comrade. What can go wrong?
Careful, Christian. This article is dangerously close to journalism. That kind of nonsense doesn't go over well here.
As to the substance... "Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) also has reintroduced a bill to more tightly regulate funding of such research."
I fully support this. And I dare say you're too stupid to vote if you don't support this. But I'd love to know how this squares with libertarianism in any way. L's love tell me the market will work it out and we should just allow a pandemic here or there in the name of Ayn Rand, praised be her name. I, and the millions dead, would beg to differ.
And no, the fact that at least two governments were intimately involved in funding this is not lost on me. But it wouldn't have been less evil or deadly if Bezos or Musk funded it. Regulation either needs to exist or it doesn't. And from where I sit, the same applies to drugs and a number of other sacred cows of the Reasonistas.
But it wouldn't have been less evil or deadly if Bezos or Musk funded it.
It wouldn’t have gotten funded.
Are we going to be able as a society live without all that $17 billion was getting us?
No. But it's got nothing to do without the $17 billion.
"but, but, but ... He's hollowing out [our] public institutions!", scream the leftards.