“`html
Science & Tech
Insights from the frontlines of federal research funding reductions
Academics describe efforts to safeguard ongoing projects and nurture talented researchers, both in laboratories and in the early stages of their careers
Harvard academics are finding it challenging to sustain laboratories and protect research as the Trump administration halts research grants and maintains continual pressure. University authorities estimate that these federal actions could ultimately cost up to $1 billion annually. Such strategies endanger laboratory employment, emerging scientific advancements, cell lines, animal models, research continuity, and the education of future scientists. The Gazette contacted faculty members to gather their perspectives on the frantic efforts to reduce disruptions during these unexpectedly tumultuous times.
Walter Willett, Professor of Epidemiology and Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
How have these funding reductions impacted your daily operations and your laboratory?
These reductions have significantly influenced our daily operations since we cannot abandon our ongoing research, now temporarily partially financed by Harvard, while also teaching and mentoring our doctoral candidates and postdoctoral researchers. At the same time, we have had to cut down our research personnel, which is distressing, and seek new avenues for both short-term and long-term funding. This has stretched the capacities of all our faculty members.
What are the possible future repercussions of these funding cuts on your research, whether for individuals, patients, stakeholders, public health messaging, or others?
These reductions jeopardize the loss of data and biological specimens that have been collected over the past 45 years and the ongoing communication with participants in our studies, which now includes over 200,000 individuals across the U.S. This data is essential for both ongoing and future research aimed at understanding the causes and possible prevention of cancer, heart disease, dementia, and other significant health challenges. More positively, this research can aid in identifying methods to achieve longer lifespans with good physical and mental health.
What are your next steps? Are you exploring alternative funding opportunities? Consolidating and safeguarding core projects? Awaiting the legal processes to unfold?
We cannot consolidate or simply wait for the legal processes to unfold, as we cannot dismiss and rehire essential research personnel or power down our freezers and data systems without losing critical resources. We are hastening our efforts to improve efficiency, concentrating on vital functions, and actively seeking new funding sources.
So far, we have managed to share our resources with other researchers nationwide with minimal costs, but we will now need to find methods to share the costs of the foundational infrastructure. The primary output of our work, knowledge about ways to enhance health and well-being, is a public benefit and often overlooked. Hence, we are intensifying our efforts to communicate this knowledge widely, hoping that federal support for public health will once again become a bipartisan issue free from politicization.
Pamela Silver, Elliott T. and Onie H. Adams Professor of Biochemistry and Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School
How have these funding reductions influenced your daily operations and that of your laboratory?
When the initial stop-work mandate was issued, we had to cease a new project that we had been planning for quite a while. This necessitated laying off newly hired personnel or seeking alternative positions for them. Unsurprisingly, this was distressing and disheartening as it meant we could no longer pursue the thrilling research agenda.
With further grants terminated, the daily uncertainties make it challenging for all of us in the group to think clearly about how to advance. That being said, the financial support from the University and Harvard Medical School has been incredibly uplifting. I remain in awe of the resilience of the junior researchers I collaborate with, who continue to show enthusiasm for their scientific endeavors.
What are the prospective future implications of these cuts to your research?
Overall, the inability to recruit new young talent and explore fresh concepts will have lasting consequences not only for my group but for our entire community. The ongoing influx of junior researchers at all levels is what energizes fundamental research and sets us apart from the private sector. For example, every summer we welcome undergraduates to our lab to engage in research, and we were unable to do this this past summer. For many students, this experience is their first exposure to a research team.
Moreover, the absence of a critical mass of researchers creates a less dynamic setting that can stifle the generation of novel ideas. We are also keen on sustainability issues concerning the planet, which are not currently prioritized by federal funding.
What are your next steps? Are you looking for alternative funding sources? Consolidating and prioritizing key projects? Waiting for the legal processes to unfold?
My team has long since maintained a diverse funding portfolio and engages in a variety of fields. Therefore, we might be agile enough to sustain ourselves for a time. We are encouraged by the assertive legal actions being undertaken by Harvard and find the rationale behind its success compelling.
As a member of the Wyss Institute, which focuses on translating research into real-world solutions, I take heart in the interest from the private sector and nonprofit entities.
Robin Wordsworth, Gordon McKay Professor of Environmental Science and Engineering, John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences
How have these funding cuts impacted your day-to-day operations and your laboratory?
These funding reductions are having a significant effect on our research. Our canceled NSF project was focused on comprehending convection in planetary atmospheres. While relevant to Earth’s climate, it lacks a direct relation to it. I cannot fathom why the administration opted to eliminate it.
What are the potential future repercussions of these cuts on your research?
Nationwide, these reductions will force…
“““html
It will be significantly more challenging to conduct essential research in the future. Planetary science is among the rare disciplines that captivates everyone, irrespective of political views. If these reductions occur, the U.S. will relinquish much of its scientific authority to China and Europe.
What is your upcoming strategy? Are you exploring alternative funding avenues? Consolidating efforts to safeguard key projects? Awaiting the legal developments?
We are exploring every available avenue to secure financing and persist with our studies. The current environment is challenging, yet I chose an academic career because of my enthusiasm for science, so backing down is not truly an option.
Christine Riedy Murphy, Delta Dental of Massachusetts Associate Professor of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Dental Medicine
How have these funding reductions impacted your daily operations and that of your lab/project?
Our federally financed endeavors primarily concentrate on the education and clinical training of the healthcare workforce, particularly emphasizing the dental sector.
This work encompasses the training continuum—predoctoral, postdoctoral, and continuing education. The federal funding halt has led to immediate and tangible effects on our daily functions. Staffing and program development have been disturbed, and we must thoughtfully evaluate essential elements of the training initiatives. Project team members face unpredictability, which diminishes morale. Planned curriculum improvements, clinical placements, and collaborations are jeopardized. The freeze not only threatens the advancements we have made but also puts at risk our capacity to adapt to emerging demands with efficiency and creativity.
What are the possible future repercussions of these cuts on your work?
A funding freeze may severely obstruct the education of both present and future dentists and other healthcare professionals in delivering care to older Americans. As the senior population increases, outpacing younger cohorts, many aging adults encounter at least one chronic health issue, with many facing multiple challenges.
By halting funding, the dental and overall healthcare workforce may lack sufficient training to address the multifaceted needs of elderly individuals. Ultimately, this could adversely affect the broader community, particularly community health centers, by limiting postdoctoral education, cutting back on ongoing training regarding elder care, and ultimately undermining appropriate care for older patients.
What is your upcoming strategy? Are you exploring alternative funding avenues? Consolidating efforts to safeguard key projects? Awaiting the legal developments?
We have already started adopting a practical strategy to prioritize the essential functions of our projects and ensure alignment with the School’s objectives. Fortunately, we will receive some research continuity funding from both the University and the School, which will aid in maintaining our progress.
Going forward, the most effective route will be to strategically diversify our funding sources and engage in scenario planning to develop sustainable revenue models. As the federal funding landscape continues to evolve, we will need to think innovatively and proactively to sustain our educational and training initiatives—ensuring that the healthcare workforce is equipped to address the changing needs of older Americans and those in rural areas.
“`