The NIH mass firings was turning point for science. This week, thousands of National Institutes of Health (NIH) employees were fired. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is based in Atlanta. It is only a few miles from my home. It was also included in the layoffs. It’s one of 27 institutes and centers of the NIH.
The Journal of Nature described the NIH mass firings as one of the darkest days.” The article quoted Michael Osterholm, an infectious diseases epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota. He said, “This will go down as one of the darkest days in modern scientific history in my 50 years in the business. These are going to be huge losses to the research community.”
So far, 20,000 NIH employees have been fired. This group includes the directors of four institutes of NIH. These are NIAID (Allergy & Infectious Disease), NICHD (Child Health), NIMHD (Minority Health), and NINR (Nursing Research)..
For decades, there has been a conservative agenda. This agenda pushes back against research findings in science and medicine. It challenges the content of science that is acceptable in public schools. Political appointees manage administrative roles in science, medicine, and health agencies. They have faced accusations of halting the work of scientists and disrupting and preventing the work of science educators. It’s not new.
What’s new is that these RIFs (reductions in force) will create dysfunction. This will affect the entire spectrum of the work of the NIH. According to some scientists, it will take months, if not years to get things back on track.
Trump’s first term added a new level of assault to an already significant phenomenon. This includes the censoring, interference, and undermining of scientists. Science educators and their research are also affected.
Trump’s purge of science in his second term is a drastic increase. It goes far beyond what He did in his first term.
Donald Trump’s first administration damaged the integrity of science. The EPA rolled back more than one hundred environmental regulations.The health of the nation was put in a crisis with more than. a million Americans dying of COVID-19. Extreme weather events were met with ignorance and mockery for the people affected. Trump made a decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. He did it again on January 20, 2025. This decision is alarming. It furthered the isolationist mentality of the president and the people who support him. Furthermore, conspiracy theories replaced scientific theories and evidence-based thinking, leading to a colossal assault on truth.
Looking back at Trump’s first term is applicable. It helps us be realistic about what the future will hold for us. The effects that I show below are based on my research for The Trump Files. There are two main parts of The Trump Files devoted to science in Trump’s first term. Two main parts of The Trump Files are “Science” and Covid-19. You can read these sections in the copy of the book, which is free to readers on this blog. Free copy of the Trump Files. You can also obtain a copy of the Kindle edition of the Trump Files here.
Environmental Rollbacks–Predictions for Trump 2.0
The key effects of Trump’s policies on science included hundreds of environmental rollbacks. These effects also involved the censoring and suppression of scientific work. Here is a list based on my book, The Trump Files.
- Environmental Regulation Rollbacks: The Trump administration rolled back more than 100 environmental regulations. This action significantly weakened protections for air, water, and land. This included easing restrictions on air pollution, water pollution, and drilling and extraction activities.
- Censorship and Suppression of Scientific Research: There were many instances of halting, editing, or suppressing scientific research studies. For example, the administration prevented the publication of climate research and undermined scientific reports on endangered species.
- Politicization of Science: Political appointees interfered in the scientific grants process. They reviewed EPA grants and scientific studies. Often, they favored industry-funded research over independent scientific findings.
- Restrictions on Conference Attendance: Scientists from various departments were barred from attending important scientific conferences. This restriction limited their ability to collaborate and share research findings.
- Sidelining Science Advisory Committees: The administration disbanded scientific panels of experts. They replaced them with political appointees. This undermined the integrity of scientific advice.
- Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement isolated the U.S. from global efforts to combat climate change and undermined international collaboration on environmental issues.
- COVID-19 Response: The administration’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic involved lying and misinformation. There was interference with scientific guidance. This led to significant public health consequences.
- Impact on Federal Science Agencies: The administration reduced the size and morale of agencies like the EPA, CDC, and USDA. This led to a loss of top research scientists. It also weakened the agencies’ ability to protect public health and the environment.
These actions collectively damaged the credibility and effectiveness of scientific research and policy in the United States. They have long-term implications for environmental protection, public health, and scientific integrity.
Expect to find all of these effects in Trump 2.0.
What was the Response of Scientists to Trump’s Attack on the EPA?
Scientists didn’t layabout. They mass protested, and professional organizations reported on all of Trump’s transgressions and lies about science. The response of scientists to Trump’s EPA changes was largely negative and critical. Key reactions included:
- Opposition and Criticism: Scientists and scientific organizations were vocal about the rollbacks to EPA regulations. Groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) strongly opposed these changes. They criticized the administration for undermining scientific integrity and public health protections.
- Resignation and Departure: Many scientists left the EPA and USDA due to the administration’s policies. During the first eighteen months of Trump’s administration, 1,600 workers left the EPA. Fewer than 400 new workers were hired. This indicates a significant loss of expertise and morale within the agency. Nearly a thousand left the USDA.
- Independent Review Panels: Scientific advisory committees were disbanded. In response, scientists like Gretchen Goldman reconvened independent review panels. They provided scientific advice on issues including particulate matter standards. These panels produced detailed reports and recommendations, which were often ignored by the EPA under Trump.
- Public Statements and Advocacy: Prominent scientific publications, like Scientific American, broke their tradition of political neutrality. The New England Journal of Medicine also broke its tradition. They publicly opposed Trump in the 2020 election. They cited his administration’s harmful impact on science and public health.
- Legal Challenges: Environmental and scientific groups filed lawsuits against the EPA. These groups include the Environmental Defense Fund and Citizens for Clean Energy. They aim to challenge the administration’s policies and rollbacks. For instance, a federal judge annulled the Trump administration’s rule restricting the studies the EPA use. This occurred after a lawsuit by these groups.
- Public Protests: Scientists and supporters participated in public protests. Events like the March for Science were organized. The goal was to advocate for evidence-based policy-making. They also pushed for increased funding for scientific research. These protests highlighted the widespread concern among the scientific community about the administration’s actions.
The scientific community actively resisted the Trump administration’s changes to the EPA. They criticized these actions, emphasizing the importance of scientific integrity. Environmental protection was also highlighted.
What impact did Trump’s policies have on climate change research?
Trump dropped the US out of the Paris Accords. Twice! Trump’s policies had several detrimental impacts on climate change research:
- Censorship and Suppression: The administration censored and suppressed climate change research. For example, the EPA was instructed to remove climate change information from its website. Climate scientists were also pressured to downplay the risks linked to climate change.
- Disbanding Scientific Panels: The administration disbanded scientific advisory committees, replacing them with industry consultants and political appointees. This undermined the scientific integrity of climate change research and policy-making.
- Limiting Data Collection: The administration rolled back data collection and accessibility. For example, they blocked NASA from monitoring air pollution after Hurricane Harvey. They also took away hospitalization data from the CDC. This hindered the ability of scientists to gather and analyze critical climate data.
- Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement isolated the country. This move distanced it from international efforts to combat climate change. It also reduced its commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
- Rolling Back Environmental Regulations: The administration rolled back more than 100 environmental regulations. These included those related to air pollution, water pollution, and drilling and extraction. These rollbacks increased greenhouse gas emissions and weakened efforts to mitigate climate change.
- Politicization of Grants: Trump political appointees interfered in the scientific grants process, which affected funding for climate change research. This politicization undermined the objectivity and effectiveness of research funding.
- Public Misinformation: The administration spread misinformation about climate change. They denied its existence. They also attributed wildfires to poor forest management rather than acknowledging the role of climate change.
- Impact on Scientific Morale: The administration’s actions led to a significant loss of morale among scientists. Many left their positions at the EPA and other agencies. This brain drain reduced the capacity for climate change research and policy development.
The effect of Trump’s cronies on climate change will be dangerous and criminal. Climate change did not appear on the National Intelligence Council’s list. This is the first time in over a decade. This list is known as the “global threat list.” Please see my blog for articles about climate change. I explain why climate change is an existential threat. I said this about his second election:
Donald Trump is now the president-elect and brings upon us another existential threat. In my book, The Trump Files, I concluded that Trump poses a significant risk. This is a conclusion I made if he were ever elected again as President. His election created an existential threat.
I identified climate change as one of four existential threats. They are as follows:
- Existential Threat 1: Climate change
- Existential Threat 2: Nuclear war
- Existential Threat 3: Natural Biorisk from Infectious diseases
- Existential Threat 4: Donald Trump
For further reading on these threats take a look at these:
Jack Hassard, The Trump Files, 2022
Bandi X. Lee, The More Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, 2024
Robert J. Lifton, The Climate Swerve: Reflections on Mind, Hope, and Survival (New York: The New Press, 2017).