It has also led to significant accomplishments like mapping the human genome, which is the foundation of many medical breakthroughs. As a medical researcher who has engaged in NIH-sponsored research for decades, Dr. Bhattacharya understands the power of these investments. Importantly, NIH grants have increased biomedical research capacities in states that otherwise would not have had sufficient resources. My state, Louisiana, has received roughly $500 million through NIH's institutional development award program. However, NIH at times appears to prioritize funding for risk-averse, incremental science. There is concern the current system incentivizes established scientists who study already proven concepts rather than younger scientists with unproven ideas. While this practice may ensure short-term success, it limits groundbreaking discoveries. I have discussed this with you previously and look forward to hearing more. NIH is facing other serious challenges. During the COVID pandemic, there was a general loss of trust in public health and scientific institutions. To restore that trust, officials need to be more transparent. You have indicated you would like to promote free and open debate at NIH. The NIH is at an inflection point. If confirmed as NIH director, you will be tasked with leading an agency that desperately needs reform. I look forward to hearing your vision. With that, I recognize Senator Sanders for his opening statement.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bhattacharya, for being with us. We will be considering the nomination of President Trump's nominee to be the director of the NIH, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. The NIH, with a budget of $48 billion, is the largest funder of medical research in the world. This research has led to new treatments that have significantly improved lives. But let me say a few words about my concerns. Our healthcare system is broken. We spend almost twice as much per capita as any other industrialized nation, yet 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured. Life expectancy is four years lower than other wealthy countries, and the bottom 50% live on average 7 years shorter lives than the top 1%. Being working class in America is in many ways a death sentence. We pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Taxpayers have provided hundreds of billions of dollars in research and development, yet we end up paying 10 times more than other countries for the same drugs. We need an NIH director who is prepared to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry. But with all due respect, President Trump will not be giving you that authority. That authority will rest with Elon Musk. It has become clear that the real person in charge of these federal agencies is Mr. Musk, and that will continue no matter who the Senate confirms. Mr. Musk and his minions at DOGE have moved to terminate 1,200 employees at the NIH and have frozen nearly all grant money. So the real gentleman we should be having up here is Mr. Musk. I hope we can schedule a hearing with him. Thank you.
Before we turn to the nominee for his own opening statement, Dr. Bhattacharya will be introduced by Senator Pete Ricketts, who will make clear the connection between you and Nebraska, which I'm not quite sure what it is. Senator Ricketts, well thank you.
Thank you, Chairman Cassidy, for holding this hearing. It is an honor to introduce Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump's nominee for director of the NIH. I met Dr. Bhattacharya during the COVID pandemic. I was governor of Nebraska, and I reached out to him for advice. He showed great intellectual honesty and courage by offering alternative suggestions. He helped me think broadly about health, not just the virus but also mental health and education. Nebraska was ranked number one in pandemic response by Politico. Dr. Bhattacharya is published in 135 peer-reviewed publications on a variety of topics. He understands the scientific method and the importance of challenging ideas. I highly recommend him. He will be a great person to ensure that NIH grants are distributed with transparency and accountability. With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Thank you, Senator Ricketts. Great. Dr. Bhattacharya, you are — if you'd like to give an opening statement, please.
Thank you, Senator Chairman Cassidy, Ranking Member Sanders, members of the Senate Health Committee. I'm honored to speak with you today and deeply humbled by President Trump's nomination. I'm delighted to have my wife Kathy, my son Matthew, and my brother Deep here. The NIH has played a pivotal role in my career. I served for a decade as a standing member of NIH grant committees and trained many scientists with NIH support. The NIH is the crown jewel of American biomedical sciences. But post-pandemic, American biomedical sciences are at a crossroads. A Pew study found only 26% of the public have great confidence in scientists. I have five concrete goals if confirmed: first, focus research on solving the American chronic disease crisis; second, ensure science is replicable and reproducible; third, establish a culture of free speech and scientific dissent; fourth, recommit to funding innovative research; and fifth, embrace transparency and regulate risky research that could cause a pandemic. I will carry out President Trump's agenda of making public science institutions worthy of trust and making America healthy again. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. I'll start with questioning. One thing that's been a real topic is the issue of measles vaccines and autism. The false article in Lancet decades ago has led to many people not vaccinating their children. There is now a child who died from a vaccine-preventable disease in Texas. I've been told that you have said we need to invest NIH resources in looking at a possible link between the measles vaccine and autism. Any comment on that?
Senator, it is a tragedy that a child would die from a vaccine-preventable disease. I fully support children being vaccinated for diseases like measles. As far as research on autism and vaccines, I don't generally believe there is a link based on my reading of the literature. But there is tremendous distrust in medicine and science after the pandemic. We have a sharp rise in autism rates, and I don't think any scientist knows the cause. I would support a broad scientific agenda based on data to get an answer.
But this has been exhaustively studied. There are limited resources. If we keep plowing over ground that has been plowed over, knowing you can never prove a negative, we have a responsibility to address things we don't know the cause for. My state is terribly affected by chronic disease. Do you have an agenda that would once more prove that the measles vaccine is not associated with autism? I'm pressing you on the opportunity cost.
I don't think there is a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. I'm convinced based on the literature. But if parents don't vaccinate, the one lever I'll have as NIH director is to give them good data. The most important childhood health problems are childhood diabetes and obesity. That's where the vast majority of effort should go. Prevention of infectious diseases is also important. Those are the priorities I'll have if I'm director. Thank you.
Senator Sanders, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Bhattacharya, as I mentioned, in some cases we pay 10 times more for prescription drugs. One out of four Americans can't afford their prescriptions. Why do we pay the highest prices in the world, and what would you do as NIH director?
I don't have a full answer, but I agree with your concern. The NIH should fund research on off-patent, inexpensive drugs. For example, the dexamethasone study in the UK was a tremendous achievement.
I apologize, but I don't have a lot of time. Historically, the NIH has spent billions developing drugs. Should a company that benefits from taxpayer research be able to charge any price?
Senator, previous NIH directors have said it's difficult for a director alone to take action. I think that's something Congress and the administration would need to work on together.
Let me ask you this. We talked about life expectancy. Why do working-class people live 7 years shorter lives than the rich?
Senator, it's the chronic disease crisis. I've devoted my career to understanding this. The solution is to address the health problems that lead to that outcome.
What role does the food industry play in selling unhealthy food to children? What will you do?
Excellent research can elucidate the link between junk food and health outcomes and give parents tools to make better choices. I would absolutely advocate for that.
Would you support restricting TV advertising for unhealthy foods to kids?
If there is a movement to encourage advertisers not to push unhealthy foods, I would be willing to lead that movement. Thank you very much.
Senator Sanders, I'm glad to see you're interested in junk food. I have a great offer: remove junk food from food stamps. We talked about precious resources. We need to get rid of frivolous studies. What do you think about changing the makeup of grant committees to focus on the big five diseases?
Senator, the resources are precious. I absolutely commit to changing the grant committee makeup to focus on the most important questions that impact American health. The research should be focused on making America healthy.
You mentioned steroids. The dexamethasone study was a signal success. Do you think we can change that kind of bias and hear open debate?
Absolutely, Senator Paul. That was a signal success, but the shame is that it was a group in the UK that ran that study, not the NIH. We can align the incentives of the NIH to look for those kinds of opportunities.
Thank you, Dr. Bhattacharya for being here. President Trump and Elon Musk are putting life-saving research at risk with grant freezes, pauses on advisory meetings, and mass firings. Do you support the recent researcher firings and grant freezes?
Senator, I was not involved in those decisions. If confirmed, I fully commit to making sure that scientists at NIH have the resources they need to meet the mission of making America healthy.
Do you support further cuts at NIH funding or staff?
I don't have any intention to cut anyone at NIH if confirmed as director.
If confirmed, what will you do about the grant freezes and pauses on advisory committees and clinical trials?
I'm going to assess it on day one, understand what the NIH needs, and make sure scientists have the resources to do their life-saving work.
I want a very strong assurance that you will get that moving again day one.
Absolutely. I'm going to look carefully at personnel decisions and want the NIH staffed appropriately to meet its mission.
The Trump administration announced an illegal plan to cap indirect cost rates at 15%. Do you know what the indirect cost rate was for Stanford last year?
I think it's on the order of 55%.
So Stanford would lose approximately $160 million per year. What do you say to your colleagues at Stanford?
Senator, I've been a researcher at Stanford. The direct costs I understand, but the indirect costs are like a 55% tip. I don't know where that goes. I think transparency regarding indirect costs is worthwhile.
Would you get the research committees and advisory councils going again immediately upon day one?
Yes, as soon as I'm confirmed. I want those advisory councils. We should all recognize that NIH is the largest medical research institution in the world and a global leader.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Bhattacharya, welcome. I very much enjoyed our wide-ranging discussion in my office. I'm going to follow up on Senator Murray's question about indirect costs. I am strongly opposed to the administration's ill-conceived and arbitrary proposal to impose a 15% cap on indirect costs. This would have a devastating impact on life-saving research and jobs. In 2023, NIH supported 1,470 jobs in Maine alone. A one-size-fits-all approach makes no sense.
should be and it's legitimate to say that we should take another look at that are we doing the right amount of for Stanford versus Jackson Laboratories or the University of Maine uh those are legitimate questions but to impose this arbitrary cap makes no sense at all furthermore and I really want to stress this this is against the law since 2017 we have had language in the labor HHS Appropriations bill that specifically prohibits the indirect cost formula from being changed and yet that is what has been done without Congressional intent or agreement or consent and the language has been carried every single year including in the continuing resolution that we're now operating under so I'm not surprised that a judge has stayed uh the order so if confirmed will you work immediately to rectify and reverse course on having a onesize fits-all 15% cap on indirect cost Senator
Senator if confirmed I absolutely commit to following the law to addressing this issue very directly. I think that this is one of these issues to me it's an indicator of distrust that some have of universities and of the scientific process and so I want to make sure that we address those concerns as well but I absolutely commit to following the law and I'll consult with agency counsel immediately and work with you Senator as we spoke of in our meeting to make sure that your concerns are addressed as well.
well thank you you testified that NIH should focus on Research involving chronic diseases and I agree that we should do a lot more in this area half of All American families report having Alzheimer's disease in their family and they're suffering from this Progressive and ultimately fatal disease is tragic but the impact is not just humanitarian it also has a huge financial impact on our nation and that burden is expected to reach a trillion dollars by 2050 for more than 12 years Congress has supported a national strategic plan to look at ways for research to come up with the means of prevention effective treatments and ultimately a cure I co authored the original Napa act as we call it in 2011 and last year with my colleague Senator Warner led the reauthorization of the national plan through 2035 if you're confirmed will you continue to support the national strategic plan targeting Alzheimer's
absolutely Senator for me it's not just a theoretical issue although I have studied it in my research work. I believe very fundamentally that there are very promising potential ways to prevent Alzheimer's that have not received support including from some colleagues of mine at Stanford University because they haven't aligned with a single dominant narrative about what causes Alzheimer's. I want to expand the set of things that we look at as a possible cause for Alzheimer's so that we can make advances. We should have had much more advances for the investments we've made to date. I want to make sure that all the hypotheses that are out there get addressed because it's a vitally important problem not just humanitarian not just for health but also for the fiscal health of our country.
thank you I'll submit the rest of my records questions for the record Senator Senator Baldwin
Senator Baldwin thank you. I want to begin by discussing the Trump administration's actions to halt thousands of NIH grants and billions of dollars in NIH research funding. Cancelled study sections and importantly advisory Council meetings mean that NIH cannot award grants to fund critical medical research. Additionally the administration attempted to illegally cap indirect costs you've already gotten several questions about that. The indirect cost rates are in blatant defiance of Appropriations law which prohibits NIH from capping these costs. I'm the ranking member of the labor HHS Appropriations subcommittee and I've been raising the alarm about this for weeks now. On Monday I revealed that the Trump Administration has halted $65 million in funding for Alzheimer's disease, stopping 14 Alzheimer's disease research centers from finding ways to treat and prevent this devastating disease. If NIH does not reverse course on these really disastrous decisions, the centers will run out of funding at the end of April. So Dr Bhattacharya, do you agree with President Trump that NIH should stop funding for research on cancer and Alzheimer's disease?
Senator I don't believe President Trump has that as a priority. If confirmed I will follow the law as I said to Senator Collins on the indirect cost recovery and my commitment is to make sure that every single researcher at the NIH, every single researcher supported by NIH money has the resources they need to do their lifesaving research.
talk about those researchers who've been fired but right now we have this Administration has halted funding for 14 Alzheimer's disease research centers do you agree with that decision?
Senator I don't have access to that information from outside. If confirmed I absolutely will look into it and make sure that I know that you're not consulting with people at NIH pending your confirmation proceedings here.
but you're not unaware that this is happening and you should have a position on this. I mean you've accepted President Trump's nomination and you're watching these actions taking place in an organization that you may someday lead. Do you agree with the stripping away of funding for cancer and Alzheimer's disease?
Senator if I'm confirmed I will make sure that the NIH researchers and the NIH researchers that are funded by the NIH outside the NIH have the resources they need to do their research. That's the mission of the NIH. If I'm confirmed, my job will be to make sure that mission is met.
so moving on. I'm concerned about how the administration's recent actions are putting especially early stage researchers at risk. We talked about that when you visited with me in my office in 2016. I worked with Senator to enact the Next Generation Researchers Act and since then NIH has increased funding for early stage investigators but now these researchers are precisely the ones being targeted by the Trump Administration and Elon Musk in his unelected unaccountable capacity. So due to the NIH funding freeze, university admissions for graduate students have slowed or even stopped, post-doctoral fellows can't find jobs to launch their research careers. President Trump and Elon Musk have fired nearly 1,200 NIH employees so far including hundreds of scientists conducting life-saving research. They put the rest of them on notice that more reductions in force are coming, and new restrictions from Trump and Musk could push out about 3,000 of the most promising early career researchers by refusing to renew their positions. This is the Institute that you may be running. These actions threaten an entire generation of scientists, they threaten our future as a global leader in biomedical research, they threaten our future health and our ability to fight diseases, and frankly they threaten our national security. So Dr Bhattacharya, you've said that as NIH director you want to increase support for the next generation of scientists. How will you repair the damage and support early career researchers? Could you please answer quickly because we're now sure just very briefly.
I'm very committed to making sure early career researchers have resources. I think that it's not just for their own sake but also because they have ideas that are at the cutting edge.
so you'll hire them back? It's I I Senator I wasn't involved in any of the Personnel decisions to date. If I look very carefully at the Personnel decisions if I...
Senator I wasn't involved in any of the Personnel decisions to date. If I'm confirmed I will look very carefully at the Personnel decisions.
thank you. And for the record, funding has not been canceled, the meeting to allocate the funding has been delayed. But just for the record, Senator Marshall.
Senator Marshall well thank you Mr chairman. As I listen to the conversation today I'm reminded that we all should doubt our own infallibility and we should doubt the infallibility of the NIH as well. I'm flabbergasted as I listen to this conversation of people that really have never been involved in the scientific process and that they don't understand the infallibility. When I think of the NIH, the waste that has occurred, and I think of Alzheimer's, the waste is the path we went down the last since 2005 or 2006. Dr Bhattacharya, do you recall there's a amyloid study that really all the NIH funds went that direction for 20 years and then we find out oh my gosh it was an NIH-funded research. You remember that that project?
yeah I mean there's a whole set of projects Senator that have been focused by the NIH on a particular hypothesis, the amyloid hypothesis, at the expense of other hypotheses. I agree with you about humility, that's the key to scientific progress. We have to as scientists say we might be wrong because when we meet data that disagrees with us, where we have ideas that we disagree with, maybe that other idea is right and we're the one that's wrong. It's only by, if I'm confirmed as NIH director, I want to make sure that all the range of hypotheses are supported. That's how you make progress. One of the reasons I think that we have not made progress in Alzheimer's as much as we ought to have is because the NIH has not supported a sufficiently wide range of hypotheses. And we also have eight different supporting institutes studying it, they don't communicate with each other as well. I mean my guess is when you make a five-year grant, 20% of those should be stopped after a year because they went down a road that's a dead end, it's time to start over.
I'm glad they're pausing these. I think that there's a significant amount of waste, fraud, and abuse and incompetence in the studies funded by the NIH. Let's talk about chronic disease just for a second. The NIH has spent disproportionate amount of money on research on diseases that impact a very small minuscule amount of Americans. Meanwhile 60% of Americans have a chronic disease. Speak a little bit about your vision of researching for figuring out the causes and treatments of chronic disease, specifically how food is medicine might be intertwined in your vision.
Senator I think the chronic disease problem is something that the NIH ought to have done a better job at the last several decades. The mission of the NIH is to address the health needs the American people have and to expand life expectancy of the American people and we have not achieved that, it's flatlined. And you say food is medicine, that's the kind of research idea that would be very difficult I think to get research support from the NIH because it's not within the scope of the people who decide what to support. I think we should expand the set of ideas to address a problem that we don't know how to address. The chronic disease problems of the United States are so broad that we need to have a lot more tolerance that the top scientists who controlled the ideas in their fields may be wrong. We need to allow other scientists who have other ideas, and food is medicine might be one of them, to have support. I don't know what's going to be the answer but I do know that if we don't...
are you committed to helping us figure out the causes of these chronic diseases?
I absolutely am Senator. I mean that is the heart and soul of the Make America Healthy Again movement and millions of Americans have been looking to us to do that. If I'm confirmed I absolutely commit to doing that.
yeah and a big part of that is the trust. Thanks to Dr Fauci, no one trusts the NIH, the CDC anymore. And we need a referee to come in and try to say well what is the latest science. Science is never settled, it's always changing. But you know what is it in ultra processed food that's causing this uptick in chronic diseases? Speak a little bit about the indirect cost of these situations. Look, I think most of us understand that that's just another grift for universities and we're paying their unfair share of overhead. But what I'm concerned about is two-thirds of research dollars are funneled to four or five states. It looks like to me just would like your commitment for us over states to spread the love a little bit, it'll prevent inbreeding and hope that you realize that not every good scientific idea comes from the coast.
Senator I have scientists colleagues from across the country and I hear your concern that the NIH ought to be more committed than it has been to making sure that every scientist no matter where they are, they don't have to be in California or the Northeast Corridor to get support. I absolutely commit to supporting the ideas program that the NIH uses to identify scientists. And just to make an exclamation point, the indirect cost at Kansas University or Kansas State are going to be less than the coast. I don't know why it's their own problem if their indirect costs are that high. It's their own problem, it's not my fault. If we can do the research more efficiently, less expensively at Kansas State University or KU, then let's move it there.
thank you Dr Marshall. Senator Hassan.
Senator Hassan. Thank you Senator Cassidy and good morning still, we're in the morning. Congratulations on your nomination doctor. I'm going to start out with a question I start all these hearings now with which is if directed by the president to take action that would break the law, would you follow the law or would you follow the president's directive?
Senator I don't believe the president will ever ask me to break the law.
well that strains credulity given especially the last few weeks, and it's a disappointing answer. I will expect you to follow the law regardless of whether the president directs you to break it. Now let me go to the second question. President Trump has effectively frozen NIH funding for existing grants including grants that directly treat people with rare diseases. My office has heard from Christine in Brentwood New Hampshire who is receiving treatment for colon cancer through an NIH-funded clinical trial but now no longer knows the fate of her care because these freezes have delayed doctors who might be needing to hire new research assistants in the trial. This colon cancer trial may not have the research staff that they need to continue treating patients. If confirmed, will you commit to reversing the across-the-board funding freezes at NIH that have delayed life-saving clinical trials?
Senator first I absolutely commit to following the law just in response to the previous question. But on this question now, absolutely. I think that if I'm confirmed as director I want to make sure that every single study that is advancing America's health, our knowledge about health, including colon cancer, goes forward.
well the freeze is really delaying things and it can have an impact as you know on treatment and especially treatments for something like cancer which can be very time sensitive. That's the harm that these illegal freezes by this Administration have really put into play here. And I hope you will speak up loudly and clearly and push back at the president and Mr Musk on these freezes. These were appropriated funds, Article One of the Constitution, and the law says that the administration is supposed to be spending those funds in accordance with the grants and the clinical trial plans. President Trump has not only effectively frozen NIH funding for existing clinical trials, he's also stopped review of new grant applications to help develop new cures for diseases such as pediatric cancer. Your written testimony focuses heavily on questioning past NIH research but you don't lay out a plan for supporting research by our talented scientists across the country to help treat devastating diseases. You've talked about this with some of my colleagues but if confirmed will you immediately restart all NIH academic review committees and get all appropriated money out the door?
if confirmed absolutely Senator. My job would be to make sure that those fundamental scientific meetings and other activities happen. The purpose of the NIH director is to support the mission of the NIH.
okay thank you. I'm going to forgo the other questions I was going to ask and just say this. For people watching this hearing, for parents who are worried about autism in particular, let me just say a couple of things. We see more cases of autism in this country than we used to for a number of reasons, part of which is we're much better at diagnosing it earlier and understanding what the spectrum of it is. We have ongoing science that is beginning to point at the NIH among other places to genetic issues that may play a part in the development of autism and environmental issues. The now retracted study that suggested wrongly and fraudulently that autism might have a relationship to the MMR vaccine has been refuted by seven studies on every continent that involved hundreds of thousands of children. So for parents out there who may think that vaccines have something to do with autism, there is no scientific evidence that it does. And it disappoints me greatly that neither you nor the Secretary now of Health and Human Services are willing to say that declaratively and strongly because what you do when you hesitate, what the Secretary does quite cynically in my view when he hesitates about this, is you churn and sow doubt and worry at a time when we should be focused on actually finding the cause and the cure of autism. Similarly, when we talk about the causes of chronic disease in our kids, there is plenty of evidence you've talked about it. Working-class folks in America have worse health than richer people, and yet you are about to join an Administration that is dedicated to giving more tax cuts to billionaires and taking away things from families, money and services from families that could help them live healthier better lives and have children less subjected to things like hunger and housing insecurity which contribute to chronic illness. So I hope you will think about that. I am over my time, and I think Senator Tuberville is next.
thank you doctor for being here. It's always good to run into somebody that's name's harder to say than mine and mispronounce more. You got a hard job in front of you but I share the ideas and desire that president has to root out waste and fraud that we have in this country because if we don't we're not going to have a country left, it's going to be gone. He's doing the right thing. You're going to have a tough job, you're going to have to put your team together and do the same thing. We have got to make sure we use American taxpayers money the right way. So kind of give me your plan of how you're going to do this when you come into office and are confirmed, how you going to put your team together?
Senator I should say I have a background as an economist as well as being a doctor. To me that background leads me to understand that every dollar wasted on a frivolous study is a dollar not spent, every dollar wasted on administrative costs that are not needed is a dollar not spent on research. The team I'm going to put together is going to be hyperfocused to make sure that the portfolio of grants that the NIH funds is devoted to the chronic disease problems of this country. It's going to be devoted to making sure we have not just incremental progress but research projects that have the capacity to make huge advances in treatment for cancer, for diabetes, for obesity. That's how I'm going to decide what the team is. And NIH is actually I'm blessed in some ways because it already has so many excellent scientists there to advise me on the areas I don't know about. I want to tap that resource, I want to make sure I talk to every single person who's already a leader at the NIH to understand where those opportunities are.
yeah well thank you. You know for past four years I've been on this committee and we've obviously gone through covid, devastating to not just our country but to world. Transparency and trust is going to have to be earned again from a lot of people. Most people across this country don't know what the hell NIH stands for, okay, but now they do because of covid. You said that science has to be reliable, exactly, but people also have to trust. You know we're finding out now we have biolabs in Ukraine where a war is going on and we're funding them. I mean and so you've got to be on top of that and you've got to the American people have to trust you that you will say listen, we're going to keep an eye on the biolabs in North Carolina or wherever we have them because it scares me to death of what's going on. What's your plan of getting trust back in this country?
Senator first of all I want to make sure that I work with Congress to make sure that there's appropriate regulation of any risky research. The NIH should not be doing any research that has the potential to cause a pandemic and I want to work with Congress to make sure that happens. As far as trust, I think the key thing is we have to be utterly open. If I'm confirmed I'll be the head of an organization that's a scientific organization. As a citizen I would often look for FOIA responses from the NIH and they'd be fully redacted during the pandemic. You can't have trust unless you are transparent. And if I'm confirmed as NIH director I fully commit to making sure that the American people can see all of the activities of the NIH openly with limited obfuscation which characterized unfortunately the NIH's way that they interacted with the American people. I think that starts with being very visual on television, telling people the truth, don't hide anything because we've been hiding things for years and that doesn't work. We found that out.
you know chairman Cassidy and I led a letter to the NIH under the last Administration asking questions about a grant that the NIH funded focused on children transitioning genders. The study followed all these children, two of them committed suicide, devastating. So how can we ensure the NIH doesn't grant funds to things like this?
well first of all I think it's if you have a negative result and it's politically inconvenient to you, you have an obligation as a scientist to report it. So the NIH funds a study that shows that gender transition doesn't reduce suicide rate among adolescents, that researcher has an obligation to report it even though she or he may think it's politically inconvenient. So I want to make sure that NIH research is required to report even negative results. And there's ways to do that we can talk about. But as far as the prioritization of studies, as I was telling Senator Paul, I think we want to make sure that the studies are focused on the diseases that really are hurting Americans: obesity. A lot of the research that you know it's so easy to come up with examples of, there's one of a shrimp on a treadmill for instance that was once funded. I don't it's not that I'm necessarily against research like that, but the American taxpayers should be focused on the needs of American taxpayers, and the research should be focused on those needs, the health needs of Americans. I want to make sure that the NIH if confirmed focus on exactly that.
thank you good luck. Thank you so much. Senator Hickenlooper.
yes I hit it and it turned itself off. Thank you for being here and for all your service. As we've already heard today and you're well aware of this, the cap on the indirect fees for all NIH grants has been traumatic to the system. It's now on a pause. Clearly the solution is some sort of more transparent, well thought out, fair system by which research in the center of the country, the South, the Northeast, the West is all on a level playing field. How long, let's assume that we get the legal stuff sorted out, the chaos comes down a little bit, how long would it take to create a new system like that?
