American Heart Association highlights importance of NIH as battle over Trump funding cuts continues
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is one of many federal agencies facing significant cuts as the Trump administration and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) continue to announce new policies they say will save U.S. taxpayers money.
The NIH cuts sparked a legal battle that is still ongoing; while the hospitals and researchers impacted by these cuts fear their work will be negatively impacted, Trump’s legal team argues the cuts are only focused on unnecessary spending.
As the debate over these cuts carries on, the American Heart Association (AHA) has published a new statement examining the “medical and economic benefits” of NIH-funded research.
“Now more than ever, we must recognize that our country’s leadership in groundbreaking medical research spurs scientific innovation, improves public health and creates new innovations that save and improve lives nationwide,” Joseph C. Wu, MD, PhD, chair of the document’s writing committee, a former AHA president and director of the Stanford Cardiovascular Institute, said in a prepared statement. “There is an imperative to avoid unnecessary disruption that threatens our global leadership as we look to adapt our nation’s research enterprise to better meet today’s rapidly evolving heath needs. We must be thoughtful and deliberate in considering opportunities to improve efficiency and transparency to ensure the NIH continues as the world’s preeminent biomedical research entity.”
The new presidential advisory, Principles for the Future of Biomedical Research in the United States and Optimizing the National Institutes of Health, is available in full in the medical journal Circulation.[1]
It examines the NIH’s long history, calling it a “global leader in funding biomedical research,” and details several key advances in cardiovascular care that were directly funded by the agency. The use of statin therapy as a way to prevent cardiovascular disease, for example, was funded by the NIH, as was the development and evaluation of different interventional treatments for coronary artery disease.
Guiding principles for the future
The advisory also suggests a variety of principles designed to optimize the use of the NIH going forward. The agency should be more involved in helping with the translation of clinical evidence into changes in day-to-day patient care, the group wrote, and there should be a “sustained public investment” in making biomedical research a “national priority.”
“The AHA encourages and supports thoughtful efforts to assess the effectiveness of NIH-funded investments to ensure they achieve the greatest impact,” Wu said. “Our principles are intended to guide efforts to ensure the NIH and other federal agencies funding of biomedical and population-based research effectively and efficiently support today’s urgent needs and future health challenges.”
Document not necessarily a direct response to recent Trump/DOGE cuts
Despite the timing of this new AHA advisory—it was published at a time when NIH funding is regularly making headlines—it was not written as a direct response to the most recent cuts announced by Trump and DOGE. In fact, Wu and the other authors began work on this document well before it was even known who would win the 2024 presidential election.
However, the AHA did note in its statement that the “future of America’s global leadership in research is at risk” and pointed to long-lasting debates among “federal elected officials” and the “medical research community.”
Click here to read the full document in Circulation.
Society of Thoracic Surgeons previously shared concerns
The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), another leading U.S. medical society, shared its own concerns over potential NIH funding cuts on Feb. 13.
“NIH’s support for medical research has been fundamental to medical advancement. Cutting these vital funds will stall progress, limit innovation, and ultimately harm patients who depend on rigorous scientific inquiry. We must invest in medical research, not reduce it,” STS President Joseph F. Sabik III, MD, said in a statement.
Michael has more than 18 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.