The Frozen Research Dilemma
Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio’s groundbreaking research is currently on hold, with critical blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers at the T.H. Chan School of Public Health. These samples, collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades, are essential to his work on multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. However, Ascherio has been unable to continue his research due to a significant loss of federal funding, which has had far-reaching consequences for the university’s scientific community.
The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding has led to the layoff of young researchers and the shelving of long-term studies, including those focused on opioid addiction and cancer. Despite Harvard’s ongoing legal battles with the Trump administration, many researchers fear that some of their work may never resume.
A Battle Over Funding and Ideology
The funding cuts are part of a broader conflict between the Trump administration and several top universities, including Columbia, Brown, and Northwestern. Harvard, in particular, has been targeted after rejecting a series of government demands related to campus protests, academics, and admissions. The administration accused the university of fostering a liberal environment and tolerating anti-Jewish harassment.
Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, claiming the funding freeze was an act of retaliation. The university emphasized its commitment to addressing antisemitism while maintaining its independence and constitutional rights. However, the Trump administration denied any retaliatory intent, stating that the grants were under review before the demands were issued.
The Impact on Scientific Progress
The funding freeze has left Harvard’s research community in a state of uncertainty. Many scientists have been forced to shut down labs or seek alternative funding sources. In May, Harvard pledged $250 million of its own funds to support research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of difficult decisions ahead.
Ascherio noted that while the university managed to cover his researchers’ salaries until next June, he still lacks resources for critical lab work. A year-long delay could set back his research by five years, he said.
Lost Opportunities and Frustration
Rita Hamad, director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, lost three multiyear grants totaling $10 million. These grants funded studies on school segregation, pandemic-era policies, and neighborhood factors affecting dementia. At the School of Public Health, 190 grants were terminated, impacting roughly 130 scientists.
Hamad expressed frustration and sadness, noting that the loss of knowledge could be irreversible. She anticipates significant layoffs if the funding freeze continues.
John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology, has also faced setbacks. His research on the role of sex in disease and doctoral student training programs were impacted by the funding cuts. He questioned whether his research could be revived even if a settlement is reached.
Mixed Reactions and Concerns
While some researchers believe changes at Harvard were necessary, others argue that the pressure from the White House has been counterproductive. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist, supported the culling of politically motivated social science studies but criticized the use of research funding as a bargaining chip.
Quackenbush and other researchers view the cuts as part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration. They warn that reduced support for students, threatened visas for foreign scholars, and new NIH guidelines could jeopardize the 80-year partnership between the government and universities.
The Future of Scientific Leadership
The potential erosion of this partnership poses real challenges for maintaining global scientific leadership. Researchers fear that the current climate may hinder future advancements and innovation. As the situation unfolds, the impact on scientific progress remains a pressing concern for the academic community.