Trump Shuts Down All Science Until He Figures Out What The Hell Is Going On
By: Doktor Zoom
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
If you want cancer research, pay for it yourself.
Doktor ZoomJan 25, 2025278
The Trump Administration has put virtually all federally funded health science research on hold for no apparent reason this week, imposing wholesale restrictions on the National Institutes of Health, America's top research agency, including "the abrupt cancellation of meetings such as grant review panels. Officials have also ordered a communications pause, a freeze on hiring, and an indefinite ban on travel."
The sudden halt to most NIH activities has "generated extensive confusion and uncertainty" throughout the agency and the wider research community, with one senior NIH employee saying "The impact of the collective executive orders and directives appears devastating."
Only Wokes Need Science
The attack on health started Tuesday with an order mandating an immediate, indefinite pause on health agencies issuing "regulations, guidance, announcements, press releases, social media posts and website posts" until those communications and others have been cleared by political commissars appointed to ensure that the administration is OK with them.
On Wednesday, Science reports,
officials halted midstream a training workshop for junior scientists, called off a workshop on adolescent learning minutes before it was to begin, and canceled meetings of two advisory councils. Panels that were scheduled to review grant proposals also received eleventh-hour word that they wouldn't be meeting.
In some cases, meetings were cancelled while already in progress.
On the other hand, now those snooty elitist "health researchers" will know what it feels like to have their lives and work completely disrupted, as punishment for making people wear masks, not cough directly on complete strangers, and even take vaccines that will turn them into mutant zombies.
Haha, take that, cancer patients!
Wonkette does not like living in interesting times. If you agree, help us help you face them by becoming a paid subscriber if you can.
Subscribe
No More Critical Race Medical Research!
In addition, the journal Nature reported yesterday that "the Trump team appears to have deleted entire webpages about diversity programmes and diversity-related grants from the agency's site."
Similarly, the FDA has scrubbed its research guidelines that were aimed at ensuring clinical trials include people from a wide variety of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. The Biden administration had urged researchers to enroll more women and people of color in clinical trials after it became clear that COVID hit poor and minority populations far more severely than the rest of the population. No more of THAT wokeness under the new regime.
After all, all human bodies are the same, so any health research into anyone other than white cisgender heterosexual men is discriminatory and divisive. Especially if that research suggests that just being Black in the United States is a risk to your health. Presumably, now we will never hear another official word about Black women dying from pregnancy complications at FOUR TIMES THE RATE of white women. Happily, the ban on any mention of race in research will likely prohibit researchers from even tracking pregnancy complications and deaths by race, thereby eliminating any possible disparities.
See? Problem solved, just like Trump said in July 2020 that we should do half as much COVID testing, which he explained would cut in half the number of cases of the deadly "Kung Flu" outbreak, haha.
The pause on health science research and communication is expected to last at least until February 1, but could go longer, who knows? Nature notes that the pause on advisory committee meetings means "the NIH cannot issue research grants, temporarily freezing 80% of the agency's $47-billion budget that funds research across the country and beyond."
Further, Science reports that NIH's top travel honcho, Glenda Conroy, emailed senior officials Wednesday to let them know that there was an "immediate and indefinite" suspension of all travel to conferences, visits to other branch offices, and other professional meetings, apart from allowing NIH staff who were already away to fly home from their now-cancelled presentations. The memo warned that "Future travel requests for any reason are not authorized and should not be approved."
Beyond essentially bringing medical grant funding and communication to an abrupt halt, there are fears that as the pause continues, ongoing research will be made useless by a lack of funding. Splinter editor Dave Levitan reports on Bluesky that according to an insider at NIH,
for all internal research (of which there is like $10 billion worth or so), ALL purchasing shut down as of yesterday. That means gloves, reagents, anything involved with lab work, which means a lot of that work will stop.
Levitan also said that one rumor circulating among scientists is that the freeze will remain in place until Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services, is confirmed. That's just speculation, of course, but it's also the sort of rumor that starts in the absence of any actual word from the administration about why they're doing this shit.
With funding and much research at a standstill, Sandy Chang, Yale's former assistant dean of STEM education and a professor of laboratory medicine, told Yale Daily News, "I'm just worried that this trend continues, that we'll lose a whole generation of scientists." He added that "Without NIH grants, we're dead."
One Bird, Two Bird, Red Bird, Flu Bird
One of the most immediate effects was the suspension of the normally scheduled release of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report" Thursday, a particularly important publication because it included multiple updates on the avian flu epidemic that has decimated poultry flocks, driving up egg prices, and which is also causing infections in of other animals, including cattle herds.
Oh, yes, and the virus has also killed at least a dozen domestic cats in California since late November. The cats, in several different cases, died after drinking raw milk that was infected with the H5N1 virus. Raw milk is an especially nasty vector for bird flu and other diseases, and the CDC warns against drinking the stuff, ever. In November the agency issued guidance to farmers that workers could become infected if they're splashed while handling milk from an infected cow. Of course, that was during the woke Biden administration, which hated freedom.
And yes, of course, RFK Jr. is also a big fan of raw milk, and in December invited Mark McAfee, the CEO of a California raw milk company, to please come work for him in Washington. McAfee's products have repeatedly been recalled after being contaminated with H5N1. Kennedy will be such a great health guy for America!
Oh, and by complete coincidence, at least two of the cats that died (and a third who was blinded and lost the use of his hind legs) drank milk from Raw Farms, a McAfee-owned brand. McAfee disputes any possibility that his milk harmed the cats, so we should shut up and take his word for it.
Before being silenced, the CDC emphasized that there are so far no signs that the bird flu virus can be transmitted between humans, and that the risk to the public remains low. Should that change, we're fully confident the Trump administration will do everything it can to prevent being blamed, or to even harm the economy by trying to stop the disease from spreading.
Trumpworld Speaks! 'Good!'
Reaction among Trump supporters has been difficult to gauge, as few believe in science anyway. An unscientific, non-control grouped sample of replies to a Twitter post about the funding freeze included comments like these:
-
Show me something that was brought to market from a research grant. That actually helped. And hadn't already been figured out. And doesn't have a safer/easier version in nature.
-
Good. The government has no constitutional authority to fund research. Time for the gravy train to end.
-
This guy just wants the cookie jar back so he can stuff his pockets
-
Excellent! NIH has been spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on DEI grants. NIH should get back to its mission to "use scientific research to improve health, extend life, and reduce illness and disability."
-
That's what happens when your institution becomes corrupted.
-
No more dogs, cats or rats to torture. Good!
-
I don't think the funding suspension needs to be brief. We have seen too many BS medical grants and gain of function research out of this agency.
-
Maybe now the market for dead baby body parts will dry up.
-
The Biopharma/medical complex brought this upon themselves.
-
Good, we don't need any new manufactured viruses
So in general, we do not need medical research, because it caused COVID, which was both a deadly pandemic and only a bad cold, so let's all go drink raw milk and take the kids to a measles party.
Tags
Who is online
41 visitors
I have one question - why couldnt Trump "figure it out" without shutting down these programs? He could , in fact, shut them down at any point, including the point after he "figured it out".
They are signaling that they are anti-science in every instance that does not involve Elon Musk.
That wouldn't soften them up, first. See who comes wheedling out of the woodwork. It's his mean way.
Obviously Trump hasn't figured out Science yet.
He should watch The Big Bang Theory-- then he'd understand!
I don't think that even Neil deGrasse Tyson or Bill Nye the science guy could help in Trump's case. Seems the orange boy is incapable of learning.
See the Dunning-Kruger effect .
Basically these people are so stupid, they think they are smarter than anyone else. Trump won't learn because he thinks he already knows everything.
Just look at tariffs for example. He's been talking about them for 8+ years, dealt with them as POTUS for 4 years, and still has no clue how they actually work.
Why pay for something he completely ignores anyway?
It is my understanding that new funding is being suspended pending review and while some activities may slow nothing has been officially cancelled at this point.
Of course I could be wrong about that.
Is it possible that they wany want to review how much is going to all projects, perhaps rank the projects in an order of importance so that decisions can be made, if necessary, where funding might be reduced, increased or stopped based on multiple factors?
Is that possible?
NO !
I am sure that you have facts to base your answer, care to share?
"No"! is the type answer I get from my great grandson (2yo) when I ask him to behave and I am confident you can do better
You should get the approval of your grandson prior to posting.
Many scenarios are possible. I think you give Trump far too much credit. Do you honestly think Trump is deliberative?
There is nothing of value to be gained by stopping or threatening stoppage prior to understanding the problem. It is more likely that this is Trump enjoying his newfound power and freedom from prosecution.
As with tariffs, Trump seems intent on playing the tough guy ... more for theatrics (and/or stroking his childish ego) than for constructive purposes.
Many scenarios are possible.
Thanks you are correct!
Do you honestly think Trump is deliberative?
Yes
As with tariffs, Trump seems intent on playing the tough guy ... more for theatrics (and/or stroking his childish ego) than for constructive purposes
When Colombia refused to allow Trump to fly back the illegal aliens to their country, the "threat of a tarrif" on their goods was enough for them to send their own planes to pick up the ilegals and take them home.
That is deliberative planning
It was a transaction.
Most transactions are a result of deliberative planning if they involve meaningful matters
Is it your opinion that Trump is deliberative more than impulsive; that he analyzes a situation and makes a thoughtful decision rather than gets an idea and stubbornly sticks to it?
Indeed.
Yes-- Trump planned carefully, thought about it-- and then realized using tariffs to manipulate people he wanted to control would probably be an effective strategy.
And it worked with Columbia.
T G
I said that the way Trump dealt with Colombia to get them to accept the illegal immigrants being returned to their country was a deliberative process
As to Trump's psyche and mental processes - you make the call
I do not see it as deliberative. I see it as the normal Trump response. This is how he operates, he attacks and uses what he can to try to bully people to do what he wants.
To me, 'deliberative' connotes planning based on analysis and thoughtful decision making, not operating (using the same transactional playbook) like the asshole he has always been.
To me, 'deliberative' connotes planning based on analysis and thoughtful decision making,
You are correct and that is exactly what Trump did - he wanted the illegal aliens returned to Colombia, Colombia refused to allow him to land a US military aircraft carry the illegals. Trump then said you will take these illegals back or you will suffer the onerous burden of very high tariffs. And just as Trump had surmised through deliberative thinking the Colombian government caved to the pressure and sent a plane for the illegal aliens.
The fact that you do not agree with his process, or his policy or his method notwithstanding - this was deliberative thinking at its best.
I disagree. It was Trump being Trump. Doing what he always does.
There is nothing insightful about a bully using overwhelming aggression to make a weaker opponent submit. This is Trump's game.
I am not going to give Trump credit for being deliberative for doing what he has always done. He executed a predictable Trump transaction. Like a dog snapping when someone tries to take its food.
You are unable to see beyond your hatred of Trump (which is your right) to accept even basic truth.
I am not going to give Trump credit for being deliberative for doing what he has always done
Perhaps he is always more "deliberative" in the crazy things he does than he is given credit for, imagine that he thinks that threatening people and forcing them to face harsh consequences might get them to go along with him.
Nothing more deliberative about thinking than that.
Don't make this personal, Robert.
Trump is replete with negatives. Predominantly negative criticism of Trump is to be expected.
Don't move from a critical discussion of Trump to you analyzing me. It is highly counterproductive and you are not qualified to do so.
It's amazing how some made and continue to make false statements about Trump hurting international relations by threatening, and only threatening, tariffs, but will never admit they were wrong when he ACTUALLY threatened these tariffs against Colombia, and they gave in within an hour.
It seems like Democrats have not shown hatred towards a president since Abraham Lincoln.
We see here the demonstration of people who are always willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, or to minimize the destruction his toxic personality and behavior has done over the course of a decade to the social fabric of this country.
I think it is shameful , and they are the ones who have to reconcile their beliefs about Trump with their own character.
It is all gaslighting on their part , although I would concede that some of them dont fully realize what they are doing.
Another strawman.
Nowhere have I argued that bullying does not work. What I have argued is that Trump's bullying tactics using outrageous tariffs hurts international relationships.
Try to work with the actual facts instead of constantly posting strawman arguments.
I could offer stronger (and accurate) words.
Something you have no idea because they have not happened. Maybe (wait for it) if he ACTUALLY places tariffs and it hurts international relationships, then you MAY have a point.
Your crystal ball of "I have no clue" is working very well.
Or, in layman's terms, the triggering of leftists to the extreme.
No one else cares.
I always find that term fascinating. If you don't bend over a table and ask for another like some have done in the past I guess that is hurting international relationships. While it is important to deal with all countries thinking there is one correct way to deal with all of them is naive at best. It is the presidents job to work with other countries but in the best interest of his own country, not worry about Kumbaya moment with them.
Nothing personal just stated a fact
You refuse to recognize textbook deliberative thinking and planning just because you do not want to give any credit to someone you hate.
I don't care
Deliberative thinking is deliberative thinking whether you are able to recognize it or not.
bugsy
Don't mistake my defense of what deliberative thinking is be confused with my agreeing in any way with what Trump does on a day to day basis.
Some respond better to threats, as Colombia has done. Others will be hard headed and will find out. When the tariffs are placed, then maybe that country will come around to reality and back down.
No one knows if it will "hurt international relations".
Oh, I didn't. I just pointed out the continued whining and bitching about making claims of things some have no idea about.
When you're negotiating with other countries and make concessions, it's not "bending over the table", you're negotiating. But apparently, according to Trump and his 'Manly' supporters, if we're not bending every other nation over the table and fucking them in the ass then we're being 'weak pussies'. It's what most worthless arrogant assholes with more testosterone than brain cells believe is 'strong man' politics when the reality is it just exposes the arrogant assholes for the weak little sniveling self-centered pricks they are.
Nice rant but always bending over all the time is giving in, not negotiating
No, you stated that I hate Trump and that this hatred has clouded my thinking.
You assume that my criticism of Trump means that I hate Trump. Private citizen Trump means little to me but Trump as PotUS is an entirely different matter.
So do not presume I hate Trump, do not presume that my thought process in some way hindered. That is your being obnoxiously personal and wrong.
I can and routinely do back up my criticism of Trump.
That is a meaningless statement. A=A.
We have a very different view of what it means to engage in deliberative thinking. You apparently hold it to mean any thinking where an action is taken to produce a particular reaction. As noted, you can observe that kind of behavior with a dog snapping at you when you get close to its food. It is acting to get you to stay away.
Similarly, Trump threatens people to get his way. It is his modus operandi. In my view, labeling that deliberative thinking makes the term meaningless.
An example of deliberative thinking would be an American jury carefully considering the facts, attempting to be objective, and coming to a thoughtful conclusion. Merely throwing one's weight around to force submission is NOT.
One who cannot see that a PotUS gratuitously and belligerently trying to publicly bully other nations rather than constructively work with them in private negotiations as partners is harming international relations is beyond reason on this matter.
But you do know about "these things" right?
Its true!
Democrats (and especially Democratic politicians!) have always shown great love and approval-- for all Republican politicians!
Since time immemorial!
Democrats (and especially Democratic politicians!) have always shown great love and approva l-- for all Republican politicians!
Since time immemorial!
(Everybody know that)
any thinking where an action is taken to produce a particular reaction.
Exactly, prior to taking an action, you have anticipated reaction and your reaction to that reaction because you focus the actions on getting to the goal you want. That is deliberative.
that kind of behavior with a dog snapping at you when you get close to its food. It is acting to get you to stay away.
That is actually conditioned response - the dog has learned that if snaps people back up
You simply cannot stand that in this case (whether we agree with the action or not) that Trump clearly knew, what he was going to do, what he was go to do if Colombia refused and what the result of his response that initial reaction would be.
Deliberative thinking
Just like Trump has learned that being a lying bully works.
Your view of deliberative thinking makes no distinction between habitual behavior (e.g. lie and bully) and objectively reviewing facts, considering alternatives, applying logic and coming to a conclusion (e.g. like what a jury does).
objectively reviewing facts, considering alternatives, applying logic and coming to a conclusion (e.g. like what a jury does).
Which is exactly what Trump did in formulating his approach to getting the illegals back to Colombia.
And it worked
Your view of deliberative thinking is much too narrow - perhaps just wide enough to support your opinion
You cannot possibly know for a fact that Trump did not simply react with a threat of tariffs once he heard that Columbia refused the migrants.
I think you give Trump far too much credit ... ignoring his clearly repeated modus operandi. Since neither of us know what he actually did, I would go with the most likely scenario and that is that Trump reacted with "slap a tariff on 'em". Reactionary actions, especially when the actions are entirely consistent with Trump's character and style, are the opposite of deliberative thinking. Again, think of a jury in deliberation rather than a simplistic action : reaction.
If Trump engaged in deliberative thinking (as a rule) we would not have tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada right now when the American people are already concerned (upset) about the price of goods. It is common knowledge that Trump is transactional and not deliberative.
Since you continue to claim that my position is based on emotional (hatred of Trump) factors rather than objective reasoning, here is a little summary from Google AI on transactional vs deliberative thinking (or will you obnoxiously presume that its response is based on hating Trump):
Back in the days of Lincoln, conservatives were called democrats and liberals were called republicans. But you already knew that.
There was no reason for the threats to Columbia we have been sending back deportees for years without a serious problem. As probably our strongest ally in Central American and with a excellent trade balance (US has a $3 billion surplus) a simple phone call explaining what we were doing why and how can we keep making this as easy as it’s been for the last four years would have worked wonders.
The tough guy BS is by someone who calls himself a great negotiator..LOL
Columbia has a population of around 50 to 55 million people and the trade between the US and Columbia is $53 billion in 2024.
The same thing could be done with Canada and Mexico but Trump needs to prove he is a tough guy so he is playing hardball but when you look at the trade between these countries they dwarf the trade between the US and Columbia.
BTW, Columbia is very involved in helping us fight the drug problem/cartels.
The last tariff fiasco that Trump started we have had to subsidize the farmers $28 billion to date.
At what point will Americans realize that Trump is the most stupid, ignorant, evil person on the planet?
Never
T G
And you cannot possibly know how in depth and deliberative the thinkin g process of Trump and his team were in the exchange with the Colombians
He had a plan, the plan worked, and it pisses everyone on the left off that the plan worked
Get over it
Kavika
Appreciate "your opinion" obviously the people involved are taking another tack
In my post I noted that neither of us know so logically we use other factors.
Threatening a tariff when Columbia rejected the migrants is consistent with Trump ... a predictable transactional reaction by Trump. You seem determined to call that a plan, you want to elevate that to deliberative thinking.
Read @2.2.33 for a better understanding of what deliberative thinking is. Because transactional, short-term responses is NOT what people normally call deliberative thinking.
Of course, 'the left'. This is what underlies this nonsense from you. You presume that criticism of Trump necessarily is ideological or partisan. Yet nowhere in my argument do I make any suggestion of this. Nor, by the way, did I suggest that your absurd insistence that a typical, consistent, predictable reaction from Trump is 'deliberative thinking' is based on you wanting to defend Trump due to you being on 'the right'. (These left / right designations are not helpful and just illustrate thinking in terms of stereotypes which mangles interpretation.)
So to your "get over it" I say get a clue.
The $28 billion is a fact not an opinion and the deportee flights for the last four years is another fact not an opinion or are any of the trade dollars nor the surplus.
Sorry if you cannot see that, but that is on you.
That is without a doubt the best comment on the entire silly article.
With a normal human being-- yes.
With Trump?
NO!
Krishna
Is your authoritative declaration based on your years of medical/psychiatric experience or on your political leanings?
Just curious?
I no longer have many political leanings-- over the years I have come to the conclusion that politicians...well let's just say that with rare exceptions they're all a bunch of scondrels and knaves!
In the worlds of the highly respected and many veneered Samuel Clemmons:
Suppose I was an idiot. And suppose I was a member of Congress.
But I repeat myself.
So your statement is based on years of medical/psychiatric experience - good to know
Why are you pursuing this? Krishna never claimed to have made a professional diagnosis. He never stated that his post was absolute fact. He offered his opinion.
Why use this recent and lame tactic of assuming posts are all implicitly statements of absolute fact and/or are only offered by professionals in the field?
Those using it typically do so because they have nothing better to offer so they just try to be obnoxious. You clearly have better to offer.
T G
I asked a question - should i route questions for Krishna through you in the future?
You have in the past complained that people take you for a Trump supporter. When you do things like this - putting words in others' mouths when they object to your attempts to normalize Trump's stupidity and overblown ego, you feed into that mistake, if it is indeed a mistake on their part.
You made a sarcastic, antagonistic comment, not a question:
There is a little game that some are playing where they complain about people opining with crap like "that is only your opinion" and "you act like whatever you say is a fact" and similar nonsense.
It is a pointless taunting game, likely because they cannot come up with a thoughtful response.
Krishna was opining, his post was like most every other post in this forum. Never did he suggest that he was qualified to make psychological diagnoses or that he made one.
I have explained thoroughly how the process with Colombia worked (deliberately) and yet you still scream "bully, tyrant, idiot"
It is you that is avoiding meaningful discussion of the Colombian immigrant situation because it does not fir with your opinionated narrative
Clearly you have nothing so you resort yet again to making this personal.
Also, you are confusing this sub-thread with 2.2. Here we were talking about your sarcastic criticism of Krishna.
The largest outbreak of tuberculosis in Kansas is barely being covered by major media. Who knows what else is spreading without accurate information?
My guess would be stupidity.
Correct.
No more dogs, cats or rats to torture. Good!
Of course not-- the illegal Haitian immigrants have eaten them all!