Our health depends on federal funding of medical research | Opinion
Erika Nyhus, Ph.D., is a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Bowdoin College. All views are the author’s own.
As a scientist, I am keenly aware of the need for federal funding of research. I am a professor at Bowdoin College who studies the neuroscience of human memory, how the brain allows us to recognize and remember events in our lives. My research on human memory has been funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
As a patient, it became life or death. I am a breast cancer survivor because of a clinical trial. In 2021, I was diagnosed with stage II triple negative breast cancer, an aggressive form of breast cancer.
Luckily, in Maine we are close to one of the best cancer treatment centers in the world, the Dana Farber Cancer Institute and its Maine affiliate, New England Cancer Specialists. After being seen at New England Cancer Specialists in Scarborough, I was referred to Dana Farber. Suddenly, the tables were turned. I became a subject in a clinical trial at Dana Farber.
The clinical trial was testing the efficacy of an antibody-drug conjugate in early stage triple negative breast cancer. Fortunately, the drug was very effective for me and this year I celebrated five years of being cancer-free. I credit this drug for saving my life and giving me a chance to see my kids grow up.
Clinical trials are the reason there are treatments available today for diseases that would have been killers just 10 years ago. The government supports medical research through the NIH and basic research through the National Science Foundation. The development of new treatments depends on federal funding of research.
Advertisement
Unfortunately, support for federal funding of research is under attack. In the past few years there have been cuts to National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation, among others. According to the Science & Community Impacts Mapping Project the projected loss from budget cuts in Maine is estimated to be $116.3 million.
These cuts have been made to increase transparency, accountability and oversight of government spending. With a budget as large as National Institutes of Health (the annual budget for NIH in 2026 is $47.2 billion) and National Science Foundation (the annual budget for NSF in 2026 is $8.75 billion) there is almost certainly some misuse of tax dollars. But cutting grants that may save lives is not the answer.
A recent proposed new rule, Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance by the Office of Management and Budget, would require all grants to be approved by political appointees. Funding decisions should not be made by politicians, but by those with the appropriate scientific expertise. I am not alone in this view. Over 56,230 people commented on the proposed new rule, most against it.
Contact your representatives to voice your support of federal funding of research and concerns about recent policies. Send an email, schedule a meeting or attend a town hall encouraging continued funding of NIH and NSF and to oppose the new rule giving funding decisions to political appointees.
As Mainers we have a particularly strong voice, as Sen. Susan Collins leads the Appropriations Committee that determines funding for the NIH and NSF. To contact Sen. Collins’ office, please send an email to Michael Mets, legislative director on issues of science and technology, Katherine Huiskes, legislative assistant on issues of health and Michael Delorge, legislative correspondent on issues of education.
I urge you join me in supporting federal funding of research.
Copy the Story Link
Tagged: columns
