A NIH proposal to conceal reviewer rankings of investigator-initiated research grants is ripe for misuse & demands a collective response (by October 13).

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya sought to spread a deadly pathogen. Does he belong in the HHS Hall of Heroes with legends who tried to contain them?

The proposal, which would have given President Donald Trump greater influence over health grant decisionmaking, could still advance in a new form.

“We should be strengthening our investment in the NIH, not dismantling it,” writes Reed Jobs.

The administration has used a list of 235 keywords – such as ‘gender’ and ‘racist’ – to prevent topics from being funded

This Medical News article discusses the estimated population-level effects of the 2025 blood pressure guideline, which expanded antihypertensive treatment eligibility.

Physicians work on both the research side and at the patient bedside, translating questions raised in clinical practice into rigorous scientific investigations and bringing those discoveries back to p...

Jay Bhattacharya's interview ended up similar in tone to the one with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last week on CNN.

Steven Quay is in final vetting to run the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

YouTube video by Científico Latino

Trump wants to run scientific research like his family business.

Hundreds of thousands of scientists, including Nobel laureates, warn that changes to the way federal grants are approved would greatly damage American science

Tens of thousands of scientists, clinicians, and ordinary citizens warned OMB about putting political appointees in charge of which research gets funded.

The OMB proposed revision is about all research — and humanities research is just as vulnerable as STEM.

A $48 billion government monopoly should give way to the market.

Mandatory reviews by top health officials and checks for 235 disfavoured terms have left hundreds of vetted grant applications in administrative limbo.

NIH Funding Opportunities and Notices in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts: Request for Information on Measuring and Rewarding Scientific Impact NOT-OD-26-087. NIH

At the NIH, political appointees exercise extensive control over scientific communication, and research on health communication is under siege.

Drop in those receiving grants and fellowships in 2025 shows impact of Trump administration rollbacks to diversity initiatives

Agency is bringing back a version of a funding limit that was quickly abandoned nearly a decade ago

The opinions expressed in this editorial are the personal views of the authors (S.E. Kahn, C.A.M. Anderson, J.B. Buse, and E. Selvin) and do not represent

The NIH has posted a request for input on a proposal to limit the number of grant awards a given PI may hold at any one time. NOT-OD-26-086 Request for Information: Proposal to Cap the Number of Si…

Staffers say comments coming after NIH’s own approvals are overriding peer review

Russell Vought is going to destroy American Science

ALT: Jordy's 'Just My Two Cents' on Breakfast TV

At public and private universities across the country, high-impact science is being damaged and derailed.

Even with federal grants largely restored, scientists say the Trump administration is still preventing those funds from reaching them. The consequences, they say, are already becoming clear.

NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya oversells benefits, ignores harms from the rapid transition to multiyear funding during the March 17, 2026 House Appropriations Committee Hearing

Large language models (LLMs) are known to generate plausible but false information across a wide range of contexts, yet the real-world magnitude and consequences of this hallucination problem remain p...

Arbitrary funding cuts and assaults on agency independence have destabilized American scientific research, potentially setting technology, health care, and the economy back decades.

The likelihood of snagging NIH grants has plunged to historic lows, forcing academic researchers to resort to a variety of tactics to try to obtain funding

This cross-sectional study uses survey data to evaluate how National Institutes of Health (NIH) K awardees perceive the effects of federal policy on research career stability and intentions to pursue ...