Monica Bertagnolli, who was appointed chief of the National Institute of Health by President Joe Biden, resigned shortly before the second presidential term of Donald Trump. Credit: Stephen Voss for Nature
“This is clearly a moment of high anxiety,” said former director of the United States of the United States Health Institutes (NIH), Monica Bertagnolli, who finished her mandate on January 17. Since his departure, an attack on directives from the administration of the American president Donald Trump, a republican, sowed perplexity and anxiety throughout the American scientific communityincluding at NIH, where Research journals and all external communications have been interrupted.
Many researchers fear that this tumult will continue if the American Senate confirms the activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr as head of the NIH parental agency, the United States Ministry of Health and Social Services. Kennedy has a long story of opposite vaccination And make false claims on the cause of AIDS. He promised to “make America again in good health” partly by revising American health agencies to focus on chronic diseases and environmental toxins.
While Kennedy is seated for his confirmation audiences this week, Bertagnolli, who was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, spoke with Nature About the revolutionary ideas of Kennedy, the upheaval of the NIH – the largest public funder for biomedical research in the world – and its biggest fears for the future.
What do you do with the Trump administration’s break on subsidy review meetings and external communications in health agencies, including NIH?
It is not unusual for an incoming administration to take a break until they set up their new people. But what has increased anxiety is the mandate expressed in this administration to completely revise health. There are so many people who depend on the effective and responsible operation of NIH.
Major biomedical founder NIH ready for a massive reform under Trump 2.0
What are the biggest challenges for the agency to move forward?
Everyone recognizes that when science is attacked, it is really a big detriment for the agency and people. It’s great to have discussions on science uses or priorities, but anti-scope is harmful to all of us. To think that we will eliminate vaccination is frankly frightening. There is no doubt that the diseases that existed during my lifetime have disappeared because of the vaccinations, and we do not want them.
There is a growing appetite of the congress to reform the NIHwhich has 27 institutes and centers. Some proposals require almost half of this issue. Where do you hope that these reforms will land?
It is never a bad idea to take a look at a great complicated organization and ask if we make optimally and if there are necessary changes.
There are two components of the structure of NIHs to remember: it must very well serve science, and it must serve those who participate in research, people who benefit from the research (and) defenders who care about a specific disease. One of the reasons why I would be reluctant to completely collapse all these institutes and centers is that these defenders have over time these institutes visible as a focal point – as an open door for them.
Kennedy launched the idea of replacing 600 employees at NIH. What do you do with this proposal?
It would certainly not be what I would do, because I would say that the work I have been able to do as a director supports it very strongly against that. I could have all the big ideas in the world, but without the team to accomplish them, they will not go anywhere.
What Trump 2.0 means for science: probable winners and losers
Kennedy campaigned on a platform to “make America in good health again” (Maha) by attacking the deep causes of chronic diseases, removing toxic environmental substances and fighting corruption of companies. Do you see an opportunity in this campaign?
These ideas that you have just articulated are absolutely essential. I dispute by saying that they were ignored by the team (previous). One of the ways we had thought that envisaged transversal biological programs (which) underlie many diseases. The link between obesity and inflammation, for example. We focused on these common fundamental ways and to discover them to identify someone at risk of developing a chronic disease early and fighting them before it happens.