Research doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It needs a foundation of stable funding, institutional support and policies that empower researchers to innovate. But today that foundation is under threat.

In this episode we dive into one of the biggest problems facing American research: the NIH funding crisis. On February 7th the National Institutes of Health (NIH) slashed indirect cost reimbursements from 50-60% to 15%. This has sent shockwaves through the academic and research communities. With this policy change universities across the country are facing an unprecedented financial squeeze and are having to re-budget, slow hiring and even rethink long-term projects.

Joining us today to break it all down is Dr. Holden Thorp, Editor-in-Chief of the Science family of journals and one of the most influential people in the world of science. With a career spanning chemistry, academic leadership and biotech innovation Dr. Thorp has been Chancellor of UNC-Chapel Hill, Provost at Washington University in St. Louis and co-founder of Viamet Pharmaceuticals. He’s also a strong advocate for scientific integrity and the role of universities in innovation.

We discuss how this funding issue may transform the US research scene, ranging from how it may affect universities to the potential of brain drain as top researchers consider migrating to Europe or China where funding is more stable. We address the lawsuit challenging the NIH policy and how uncertainty is already delaying significant projects such as Johns Hopkins' $330 million neuroscience facility and critical maternal health initiatives.

Dr. Thorp discusses whether universities should rely more on industrial relationships, or if this risks diluting curiosity-driven research. We also discuss how universities, organizations, and state governments might work together to put pressure on Congress and find strategic solutions. 

In This Episode:

[01:17] Explanation of the NIH’s February 7th directive, which capped indirect cost reimbursements at 15% instead of the usual 50–60%.

[02:05] Dr. Thorp breaks down the difference between direct and indirect research costs, using a cooking analogy to explain how universities rely on indirect cost recovery for infrastructure, lab maintenance, and tech transfer operations.

[04:12] How the federal government and universities developed a shared-cost model for research after World War II to encourage curiosity-driven discoveries.

[05:40] How funding uncertainty affects long-term projects. Risks to major initiatives like Johns Hopkins’ $330 million neuroscience facility and Michigan State’s maternal health programs.

[06:15] Many universities borrow against future indirect costs to finance construction. The new NIH policy threatens these financial models, potentially affecting bond ratings and making future research investments more expensive.

[07:32] Dr. Thorp explains how these funding cuts could drive top international researchers to Europe and China, where funding structures are more stable.

[10:22] Some universities are now adding caveats to admissions letters, warning that funding isn’t guaranteed. Risks of eroding trust in academia as a stable career path.

[12:29] Beyond litigation, universities must build coalitions with industry, nonprofits, and state governments to pressure Congress and prevent further damage.

[16:10] They have a Trump tracker with very up-to-date funding information. It's also in the Science Advisor newsletter. 

[17:15] The potential role of biotech firms and philanthropic ventures in filling funding gaps. Risks of diluting curiosity-driven research.

[20:23] Many HBCUs and regional universities rely heavily on NIH funding, and these cuts could exacerbate existing inequities in research capacity.

[24:28] Comparisons to the 2008 financial crisis, the 2013 sequestration, and other funding challenges. This situation is unique. 

[28:45] Can protests and public pressure force change? The impact of researcher protests, bipartisan pushback in Congress, and media scrutiny. 

[31:34] Dr. Thorp questions whether historically competitive universities will set aside differences and embrace shared research infrastructure and open-source models.

[33:04] Young researchers should stay the course, emphasizing that science is cyclical and funding priorities will shift again.

[34:53] It's important to talk about the economic impacts and issues with healthcare related to budget reductions.

[37:20] The scientific community’s ability to adjust and innovate will be key to weathering this storm.

Resources: 

Holden Thorp, Ph.D.

Dr. Holden Thorp - AAAS

ScienceAdvisor Newsletter

Dr. Holden Thorp - Columbian College of Arts & Sciences

Dr. Holden Thorp - LinkedIn

Engines of Innovation: The Entrepreneurial University in the Twenty-First Century

Our Higher Calling: Rebuilding the Partnership between America and Its Colleges and Universities