Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
NIH restrictions on foreign research partnerships significantly impacted 1 in 4 U.S. scientists
AAndres Vidal-Gadea’s neuroscience research was going well. A molecular neuroethologist at Illinois State University, he studies the function of genes, sussing out ways to stop the progression of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. To do so, Vidal-Gadea would knock out genes in nematodes, then have those worms attempt to burrow in dirt or go for a swim to see happened to their muscles.
Vidal-Gadea was garnering reliable funding from the National Institutes of Health along with a steady stream of publications. But he increasingly was getting a critique from grant reviewers: It was time to move from nematodes into mice, to see if his observations held in animals more closely related to humans — a necessary step to move any insights into human trials. So, he searched for potential collaborators who had the right kinds of mice, and could do the experiments he needed.
Vidal-Gadea found those collaborators in the Netherlands, and in March 2025 they began writing grant proposals together. But shortly thereafter, he said, “this entire thing kind of fell through.”
...............
In a recent nationwide survey STAT conducted of nearly 1,000 NIH-supported scientists, 25% of respondents said their research had been impacted a great deal or a fair amount by the move away from foreign subawards, and 20% said they had been affected a little. Trump administration officials said they acted to increase accountability and transparency, but the funding halt has disrupted clinical trials, forced scientists to alter or abandon projects, and led to a year-long pause on applications while the agency transitions to a new funding mechanism for work done in collaboration with researchers outside the U.S.
Vidal-Gadea was garnering reliable funding from the National Institutes of Health along with a steady stream of publications. But he increasingly was getting a critique from grant reviewers: It was time to move from nematodes into mice, to see if his observations held in animals more closely related to humans — a necessary step to move any insights into human trials. So, he searched for potential collaborators who had the right kinds of mice, and could do the experiments he needed.
Vidal-Gadea found those collaborators in the Netherlands, and in March 2025 they began writing grant proposals together. But shortly thereafter, he said, “this entire thing kind of fell through.”
...............
In a recent nationwide survey STAT conducted of nearly 1,000 NIH-supported scientists, 25% of respondents said their research had been impacted a great deal or a fair amount by the move away from foreign subawards, and 20% said they had been affected a little. Trump administration officials said they acted to increase accountability and transparency, but the funding halt has disrupted clinical trials, forced scientists to alter or abandon projects, and led to a year-long pause on applications while the agency transitions to a new funding mechanism for work done in collaboration with researchers outside the U.S.
https://www.statnews.com/2026/03/27/nih-funding-national-researcher-survey-foreign-subaward-ban-impact/