Why Cutting NIH Funding Would Harm Medical Innovation and Patient Care

The United States boasts a remarkable legacy of scientific research and discovery. Thanks to the pivotal work funded by the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, 90 percent of children diagnosed this year with the most prevalent form of leukemia can expect to be cured. For babies diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, once a condition destined to lead to early death, the outlook has drastically improved. Patients diagnosed with cancer today are 34 percent less likely to die from the disease compared to three decades ago. NIH-funded research is instrumental in advancing treatments for conditions such as heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, and more. This research not only drives medical innovation but also instills hope in countless patients across the nation.

However, the proposed cuts to NIH funding, amounting to at least four billion dollars annually, threaten to undermine this critical leadership in medical research. As we lead major research medical centers and conduct physician-led research ourselves, we express profound concern about the immediate and potentially devastating consequences these cuts might inflict on patients, their families, and the long-term capacity of our nation to achieve groundbreaking medical advancements.

The Foundation of U.S. Medical Research

Since the conclusion of World War II, medical and scientific research in the United States has largely flourished through a collaborative system that blends public and private efforts. This system relies on competitively awarded grants funded by the federal government that invigorate research endeavors within universities and hospitals nationwide.

Two principal factors contribute to the success of this partnership. First, it enables esteemed American research institutions to attract the most skilled physicians, scientists, and talented students. This winning combination is essential for generating scientific breakthroughs. Second, this system operates with remarkable efficiency. By conducting research within non-governmental facilities, the federal government shares only part of the operational costs without bearing the burden of constructing and maintaining its own infrastructure or managing a large workforce.

Research Funding: A Rigorous Process

Only the most promising research proposals — roughly one in five — receive funding. The government’s commitment to finance a research project involves agreeing to share the necessary expenses, including utilities and compliance with federal regulations. This financial arrangement is carefully negotiated and subjected to regular audits to prevent overcharging or misappropriation of funds by universities.

The imminent funding cuts threaten to withdraw billions of dollars destined for ongoing biomedical research. This funding sustains the critical infrastructure necessary for maintaining labs, supporting personnel, and operating sophisticated technologies, such as supercomputers, MRIs, and electron microscopes, vital for discovering new cures.

The Consequences of Funding Interruptions

An interruption to these essential funds could yield dire consequences. Clinical trials may face suspension, experiments might cease, and laboratories could close, leading to the loss of invaluable staff. Such disruptions would have an immediate effect on patients currently enrolled in trials for new therapies targeting conditions like hypertension, heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and cancer, ultimately setting back progress by years in numerous cases. For many trial participants, the abrupt cessation of clinical work could mean being sent home with no further options or hope.

Moving Forward: Strengthening Collaborations

Our institutions remain dedicated to upholding the trust placed in us by our communities, our patients, and American taxpayers. We stand ready to collaborate with the current administration to enhance the partnership between the government and research institutions — a partnership that has contributed immensely to public health and wellness in our country. Our approach should begin by addressing the burdensome regulations and excessive bureaucracy that hinder research progress and discovery, rather than interrupting the essential flow of critical and life-saving research.

Instead of instituting cuts that could derail a system providing immense benefits, we should pursue collaborative solutions that seek common ground. Continuing this partnership is essential for maintaining progress. The proposed funding cuts will not propel America forward; rather, they risk stalling our medical research enterprise, undermining both innovation and patient care.

Robert A. Harrington, MD, serves as the dean of Weill Cornell Medicine and provost for Medical Affairs at Cornell University.