NIH director struggles to defend his own plan to reduce $ 18 billion in medical research

Washington-The director of the National Health Institutes, Jayanta Bhattacharya, received a cold reception of the Democratic and Republican senators on Tuesday when he defended the request for budget of his agency for 2026, which would reduce billions in the avant-garde biomedical research on cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes and other health conditions.

NIH is considered The Crown Jewel of American science and the world leader in research and biomedical innovation. Senators in both parties are proud of their success and their own roles to boost their funds over the years in support of medical advances.

Then Bhattacharya had to know that his budget application would land with a deaf noise, since he presented it to a Senate assignments subcommittee. He was still trying to square two things that made no sense: that Trump is committed to preserving the role of the United States as a leader in biomedical research, and that his cuts proposed for $ 18 billion to the agency next year, or 40% of all its budget, will not hinder that.

The senators did not buy it. Sometimes, Bhattacharya didn’t seem to defend him either.

Senator Susan Collins (R-MAINE), who presides over the Committee of Assignments of the Complete Senate, described the cuts proposed by the administration to NIH “so disturbing”.

“It would undo years of investment in Congress in NIH, and delay or prevent effective treatments and priests for diseases,” said Collins. “We also risk being behind China and other countries that are increasing their investment in biomedical research.”

In particular, he asked why the administration is asking for the reduction of funds by 40% for the National Aging Institutes, which finances most of Alzheimer’s research, when he has successfully developing drugs and blood analysis.

Bhattacharya, without defending his own proposed cuts, said that “the intention” of the Trump administration is to lead the world in biomedical research, which suggests that Congress could make a counterofferte and potentially propose more expenses.

“The budget is a collaboration effort between Congress and the Administration,” he said.

Collins simply replied: “We hope to work with you to remedy these problems and budget deficiencies.”

Getty images

Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), The main Democrat in the appropriation panel, started the “catastrophic” cuts from administration to NIH to date. He said Trump has so far forced almost 5,000 employees, prevented almost $ 3 billion from subsidies, and ended almost 2,500 grants for a total of almost $ 5 billion for the investigation that saves lives.

“The Trump administration is already systematically dismantling the American biomedical research company that is the envy of the world, throwing billions in economic activity in each of our states,” Murray smoked. “This budget proposal effectively lost our leadership in the innovation and competitiveness of the research to China.”

He was entangled with Bhattacharya in one of the dozens of clinical trials that have stopped due to NIH frozen funds: a 23 -year research effort to develop an HIV vaccine. The scientists are at “the cusp of a functional cure for HIV,” he said, and now 6,000 people in that essay have been separated from treatment.

Bhattacharya jumped to say that she is “absolutely committed” to support research on HIV.

“But the HIV investigation in Fred Hutch ended that, again, it was at the cusp of a treatment for 6,000 patients throughout the country,” Murray replied, referring to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.

“You did that,” he said, while talking to each other.

“I would have to answer that,” Bhattacharya said.

“You did that,” he repeated.

After more round trip, NIH director said again: “The budget application is a negotiation work between Congress and the Administration.”

Minutes later, he said it once again, since Murray pressed to obtain details about how many less clinical trials would have next year due to the cuts proposed by the Trump administration.

“I will say this,” Bhattacharya said. “The budget itself is a negotiation between Congress and the Administration.”

He also said it several other times. In fact, it was clear that this was the reference line of the NIH director to defend his own devastating budget application. Simultaneously allowed him to support his bosses (Trump, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., without discussing exactly in support of his specific cuts.

“President Trump has committed that the United States be the leading biomedicine nation in the 21st century,” he said in a moment. “Completely support that goal.”

“Well, I do it too, but it is difficult to understand how we are going to get there when the budget cuts the funds,” said Senator Jeanne Shaheen (dn.h.). “Particularly in critical research areas where our most critical competitor, the Chinese, are increasing financing in these areas and we are reducing budgets.”

Bhattacharya did not respond.

Jim Watson through Getty Images

You may not have accepted some of the cuts in your budget. Bhattacharya certainly participated in the preparation of his agency’s budget, but also other White House officials and the Department of Health and Human Services. Before becoming director of NIH in April, Bhattacharya was a professor of Medicine, Economy and Health Research Policy at Stanford University. He knows how vital and highly estimated is NiH, worldwide.

Why not put it in Congress to save it?

“You say this is a collaboration effort, and you are right, and I encourage Congress to exercise its authorities,” said Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kansas). “If Congress would provide additional dollars beyond the president’s budget application, how would we do as a committee and how you, like NIH, would recommend prioritizing that expense?”

Bhattacharya said he has focused on the “real health needs” of Americans, such as diabetes and cancer, and the “need to think big” to advance science.

“Once again, the budget is a collaboration effort,” he said. “But I think it will be important that we address the real problems in the science and real needs of the US people with any budget that comes out. That is my job.”

Moran redirected Bhattacharya to the need for more funds in NiH.

“I guess that means we need more resources,” said the Republican senator. “And you would give them good use. Is that precise?”

“That is my job,” NIH director replied.