To the Editor:
Re “Deep Cuts to Medical Research Funds Could Hobble University Budgets” (information article, Feb. 9):
I’ve watched President Trump subject a flurry of government orders with rising alarm, however none have hit fairly as arduous as his reckless determination to slash Nationwide Institutes of Well being funding. Though a court docket briefly blocked the cuts, I worry that the work of N.I.H. and college researchers continues to be in peril. The American folks will undergo if lifesaving analysis and medical trials are not obtainable.
Our household is aware of the worth of this essential work firsthand. My husband was a part of a number of medical trials on the N.I.H. to deal with his prostate most cancers. The group supplied completely different remedies as wanted, they usually labored. He’s now cancer-free, and we credit score the N.I.H. for saving his life.
I fear that on this local weather, one other household wouldn’t be as lucky. Do members of the Trump administration understand that their actions have an effect on particular person lives, not simply establishments? Extra essential, do they even care?
Marilyn Fenichel
Hamden, Conn.
To the Editor:
I’m not a scientific particular person. Nor am I extremely political. However one factor I do know as a breast most cancers survivor is that my life and the lives of hundreds of thousands of different most cancers survivors have been made potential by means of biomedical analysis funded by the Nationwide Institutes of Well being.
I used to be in a position to profit from a long time of N.I.H.-funded analysis in order that my aggressive most cancers didn’t cease me from regaining my well being and residing my finest life with my husband and two younger kids. Placing a freeze on N.I.H. funding might instantly halt initiatives which have the potential to remedy or alleviate affected by horrible ailments like most cancers, Alzheimer’s or A.L.S.
Biomedical analysis funded by the N.I.H. is the envy of the world. It has an affect on each one in all us who calls america dwelling. Analysis advances don’t know your political celebration, your faith or wealth. Analysis has the potential to cross all strains and tie us collectively as people, enhancing life for all of us.
People perceive group efforts, and this is a crucial one. Our analysis establishments additionally want federal help to cowl the oblique prices of this very important work that’s undertaken for the nice of every American. I urge the Trump administration to unfreeze N.I.H. funding in order that America can stay as much as its potential, for the sake of us all.
Lorrie Flom
Pittsburgh
To the Editor:
The Trump administration’s plan to limit funding of “oblique prices” — for maintenance and administration of laboratories and different essential capabilities — on N.I.H. grants will decimate biomedical analysis at universities all through the nation, together with in “purple” states and at “nonelite” establishments. Though the system because it has developed just isn’t excellent, oblique prices present the funds to maintain essential infrastructure.
Opposite to what has been prompt, these funds aren’t used to advertise a D.E.I. agenda or “liberal” causes. With out enough and predictable funding from the N.I.H., biomedical analysis and American competitiveness will undergo a near-fatal blow. The results will final generations.
Stuart H. Orkin
Brookline, Mass.
The author is a professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical Faculty and an investigator on the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
To the Editor:
“How Trump’s Medical Research Cuts Would Hit Colleges and Hospitals in Every State,” (The Upshot, nytimes.com, Feb. 13) paints a stark image of the widespread and antagonistic results of the Trump administration’s proposed reductions in funding for the Nationwide Institutes of Well being. However largely left unsaid are the detrimental results it should have on America’s work drive.
Chopping N.I.H. funding won’t solely threaten the greater than 410,000 existing jobs it helps help, but in addition scale back alternatives for younger and proficient American researchers to entry hands-on coaching and develop real-world expertise. Furthermore, upending our nation’s analysis work drive pipeline might considerably weaken America’s place as a world-class chief in science and know-how.
Voters acknowledge that scientific analysis contributes to society; practically eight in 10 throughout events help taxpayer spending on it, in keeping with a recent study. They see lifesaving medication, a aggressive work drive and nationwide safety as essential returns on these investments. The present administration would possibly profit from seeing it too.
Daniel Jacobs
Washington
To the Editor:
Re “Trump’s Layoffs Target Talented Young Scientists” (information article, Feb. 18):
In shedding proficient younger scientists on the Facilities for Illness Management and Prevention and the Nationwide Institutes of Well being, President Trump and his minions are gutting the way forward for medical analysis.
Don’t Republicans get most cancers, coronary heart illness or diabetes? Or do they assume these and different human maladies have an effect on solely Democrats? Don’t they care concerning the future well being and well-being of their kids and grandchildren?
Judith Tuller
New York
Outrage Over Trump’s Claims About Ukraine
To the Editor:
Re “Trump Calls Zelensky ‘Dictator’ as Feud Grows” (entrance web page, Feb. 20):
The catalog of Donald Trump’s lies has been nicely documented on this newspaper, however his newest statements — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine is a “dictator with out elections,” and Ukraine is responsible for the battle with Russia — are so outrageous and despicable that they transcend easy lying.
We are actually residing in a world the place unsuitable is correct, down is up, out is in.
Robert Wiener
Paris
To the Editor:
Re “A Hero to Biden Is a Villain to His Successor” (information evaluation, entrance web page, Feb. 20):
President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine wasn’t seen as a hero solely by President Joe Biden. He was additionally seen as a hero by hundreds of thousands of People who took to social media and donated money and time to help Ukraine. T-shirts and sweatshirts proclaiming help for Ukraine had been seen all over the place. Russia’s aggression was seen for what it was: an overt act to take over an unbiased nation. In different phrases, for Russia it was enterprise as regular.
President Trump’s try and flip the script — on this case, blaming Ukraine for beginning the battle and calling Mr. Zelensky a dictator — is a repeat tactic utilized by Mr. Trump.
On Russia and Ukraine, the president’s incapacity to be his personal man not leaves any doubt about the place his sympathies lie or what he views as probably the most useful to his personal ambitions. It’s no marvel that President Vladimir Putin of Russia seems to be smirking in so many pictures of him and President Trump.
Changing into bedfellows with Russia and promoting out America and democracy will possible dominate President Trump’s legacy.
Patricia Weller
Emmitsburg, Md.
To the Editor:
In view of President Trump’s stunning pivot on Russia, I hope that Congress may have the integrity to cross a bipartisan decision restating in easy phrases what has been the U.S. view of Russia for many years: that it’s an aggressive menace to freedom around the globe.
Is it an excessive amount of to ask that Congress state the plain fact that Russia was the aggressor in Ukraine? Such a transfer, whereas not binding on the president, could be of some reassurance to our allies.
Paul Eklof
Petaluma, Calif.
