When President Trump took over as the federal government, one of the turbulent institutions was the public funders of the National Health Research Institute-world-leading biomedical research.

The new government applied power outages about NIH and other health institutions.

These actions, except for other actions, scientists and doctors have caused universal confusion, anxiety and fear among scientists and doctors in scientists and doctors in the NIH campus and institutions that depend on institutional funds.

"This is a huge transaction," said Haley Chatelaine, a postdoctoral researcher studying the basic honeycomb function at NIH, said he provided bargaining for the union of 5,000 NIH researchers. She is one of the only Nih employees willing to speak with NPR.

Chatelaine said: "Science moves at an amazing speed. We ask us to work together in the scientific community." "Any gap we experience has brought us to the research on cutting -edge biomedical research that Americans need to maintain healthy."

Exchange clamping, but signs of melting

NIH issued a statement on Monday night saying that the communication power outage had begun to be lifted, and some conferences and travels were recovering. NIH has restored the closing meeting of the committee of the Federal Advisory Committee Law. The meeting includes the consulting committee and the board of directors and the scientific review team.

In addition, NIH proposes the obstacle to submitting Federal Registration Book, The statement said that the formal communication and travel with public officials "support the internal business of NIH for supervision and/or scientific behavior.

However, the recruitment of NIH still exists, and it is forbidden to start any new research projects on the Nih campus, and stop recruiting any clinical research on the agency for the institution.

"This incredible and frustrated," said Marjorie Levinstein, another post -doctoral researcher of NIH and the league. She studied addiction and said that she must do my best in research. "This does damage our ability to make huge medical breakthroughs."

NIH spends most of the agency's annual budget at the funds of thousands of researchers other than agencies from universities, hospitals, medical schools, and other institutions.

So far, NIH's funds seem to be flowing, but there is uncertainty, and reports about whether the gifts are being handled and all payments are contradictory.

Officials from many institutions are worried about what will happen next. Kevin Wilson, vice chairman of the American Cell Biology Society, said: "I ... I heard that some off -campus institutions are sustaining expected expenses.

Uncertainty and a feeling of uncertainty

At the School of Medicine of Yale University, Daniel Colon-Ramos, Daniel Colon-Ramos, Daniel Colon-Ramos: "This is The most uncertain time in my career and career. "" At present, in the scientific community, the general feeling is one of the uncertainty and attention.

Even Nih's biggest fan also said that the agency is far from perfect. For some time, some changes have been considered, such as making the gift review process more transparent. However, many scientists inside and outside NIH are describing NIH's hunch.

Dr. Harold Varmus, a scientist at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, said: "Mr. Trump to improve the theme of the president is that this new government will wage war on health institutions in some way." Six years in the 1990s. "This will have a huge impact on health science. All of these are terrible signs of we need to face it."

Trump tried to reduce the NIH budget when he first served as the president, and hoped that the long -term NIH critic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Leaders were responsible for supervising the Nih's health and public service department. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a researcher at Stanford University, criticized NIH during the period of great popularity. His confirmation hearing has not yet been arranged.

"Most scientists are very worried." Bruce Alberts, a honorary professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the University of California San Francisco, agreed that he served as Dean of the National Academy of Sciences from 1993 to 2005. Ignoring the best science and publishing the statement and views that are not based on the best science, but more based on emotional and misunderstanding science. "

The scientific policy and strategic Prime Minister special consultant of the Prime Minister of San Francisco, California, said, "I have serious attention." "I have serious attention." "People are frustrated with the chaos and chaos of sowing, and I don't really know what to do."

However, many observers also say that if the ban is temporary, the long -term impact may be moderate.

Dr. Ashish Jha, the dean of Brown University, said: "If all this lasted for a few days or weeks, and then was lifted through some potential reforms, then we can evaluate these reforms based on its advantages. This is good." Public health. Essence "But boy, this is indeed destructive and harmful at present."