![\"Beagle](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.animals24-7.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/Picsart_25-05-03_20-19-09-541-e1746328805740.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n(Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n WASHINGTON D.C.\u2013\u2013<\/strong>Have animal advocates become part of a smokescreen for $18 billion in Donald Trump administration cuts to the National Institutes of Health [NIH] budget?<\/p>\n The NIH budget was $48.5 billion in fiscal 2025,\u00a0 but is to be slashed to $27 billion in 2026,\u00a0 according to the Trump budget plan.<\/p>\n Animal advocacy group spokespersons quickly and loudly applauded on April 29,\u00a0 2025,\u00a0 three days before the Trump budget plan was released,\u00a0 when National Institutes of Health director Jay Bhattacharya announced what an NIH media release described as \u201ca new initiative to expand innovative,\u00a0 human-based science while reducing animal use in research.\u201d<\/p>\n Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D. (NIH photo)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Said Bhattacharya,\u00a0 \u201cFor decades, \u00a0our biomedical research system has relied heavily on animal models. \u00a0With this initiative, NIH is ushering in a new era of innovation.<\/p>\n \u201cBy integrating advances in data science and technology with our growing understanding of human biology,\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0Bhattacharya explained,\u00a0 \u201cwe can fundamentally reimagine the way research is conducted\u2014from clinical development to real-world application.<\/p>\n \u201cThis human-based approach,\u201d\u00a0 Bhattacharya promised, \u00a0\u201cwill accelerate innovation, \u00a0improve healthcare outcomes, \u00a0and deliver life-changing treatments.\u201d<\/p>\n Figuratively rising to cheer,\u00a0 and to claim credit for the perceived transition in NIH policy,\u00a0 were representatives from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,\u00a0 Animal Wellness Action,\u00a0 and Humane World for Animals,\u00a0 among others.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n But the NIH announcement was long on rhetoric that could have been cut and pasted from antivivisection literature,\u00a0 short on specifics,\u00a0 and hid an apparent poison pill beneath a sugar coating.<\/p>\n The sugar coating,\u00a0 swallowed by practically every animal advocacy commentator:<\/p>\n \u201cDeveloping and using cutting-edge alternative non-animal research models aligns with the U.S. Food & Drug Administration\u2019s recent initiative to reduce testing in animals.\u201d<\/p>\n (See <\/em><\/strong>28 years later, FDA is \u201creplacing animal testing,\u201d new chief Makary says<\/a>.)<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The poison pill:\u00a0 \u201cWhile traditional animal models continue to be vital to advancing scientific knowledge,”\u00a0 meaning that animal research will continue to be done on every front where research continues at all,\u00a0 “using new and emerging technologies can offer unique strengths that, \u00a0when utilized correctly or in combination, \u00a0can expand the toolbox for researchers to answer previously difficult or unanswerable biomedical research questions.\u201d<\/p>\n Note that \u201ctraditional animal models continue to be vital,\u201d\u00a0 while non-animal research methods are described only as \u201cusing new and emerging technologies,\u201d\u00a0 followed by a string of disclaimers.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n The Bhattacharya announcement and animal advocacy group enthusiasm had three whole daily news cycles to gain momentum before the Trump administration 2026 budget outline was released late on the afternoon of Friday,\u00a0 May 2,\u00a0 2025,\u00a0\u00a0 meaning that little of the content would reach the public until after the weekend.<\/p>\n The Trump administration budget proposal makes clear that any reduction in NIH reliance on animal models is likely to result from budget cuts killing entire avenues of biomedical research inquiry,\u00a0 not from \u201creduction,\u00a0 refinement,\u00a0 and replacement\u201d of animal models as studies advance.<\/p>\n The present 27 NIH centers and institutes are to be consolidated into just five.\u00a0 This may save some administrative expense,\u00a0 but will mostly mean that many avenues of research will stop dead.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n The surviving institutes will be merged into the National Institute on Body Systems Research; \u00a0the National Institute on Neuroscience & Brain Research; \u00a0the National Institute of General Medical Sciences; \u00a0the National Institute of Disability Related Research; and the National Institute on Behavioral Health.<\/p>\n This short list includes by implication all of the branches of biomedical research that have traditionally used the most animals in the most controversial experiments.<\/p>\n While non-animal research methods may be used in projects funded by any or all of the newly formed five institutes,\u00a0 none of them have either an explicit or implied role in promoting non-animal research methods,\u00a0 while all of them will inherit existing animal laboratories and continuing animal experiments,\u00a0 with little budget to develop new directors.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cThe Bhattacharya announcement details several agency actions to better prioritize innovative human-centered research,”\u00a0 acknowledged Catharine E. Krebs, \u00a0PhD, medical research program manager for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine,\u00a0 \u00a0 “including establishment of [a new] Office of Research Innovation, Validation, \u00a0and Application (ORIVA).\u201d<\/p>\n Indeed,\u00a0 the Bhattacharya announcement expressed intent to establish ORIVA \u201cwithin NIH\u2019s Office of the Director,\u201d\u00a0 Bhattacharya himself.<\/p>\n \u201cThe new office will coordinate NIH-wide efforts to develop, \u00a0validate, and scale the use of non-animal approaches across the agency\u2019s biomedical research portfolio and serve as a hub for interagency coordination and regulatory translation for public health protection,\u201d\u00a0 the NIH media statement said.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cORIVA will expand funding and training in non-animal approaches and awareness of their value in translational success,\u201d\u00a0 the media statement continued.\u00a0 \u201cNew funding opportunities will include evaluation criteria that assess methods based on their suitability for the research question,\u00a0 context of use, \u00a0translatability, \u00a0and human relevance. \u00a0Infrastructure for non-animal approaches will also be expanded to make these methods more accessible to researchers.<\/p>\n \u201cIn addition,\u201d\u00a0 the NIH media release promised,\u00a0 \u00a0\u201cgrant review staff will participate in mitigation training to address any possible bias towards animal studies and integrate experts on alternative methods into study sections.\u00a0 NIH will also publicly report on research spending annually to measure progress toward reduction of funding for animal studies and an increase in funding for human-based approaches.\u201d<\/p>\n White Coat Waste Project founder Anthony Bellotti. (Facebook photo)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n But all of that depends on the NIH actually being allocated enough money to do it,\u00a0 along with fulfilling other Congressionally mandated funding obligations.<\/p>\n White Coat Waste Project founder Anthony Bellotti was not impressed,\u00a0 pointed out in a Facebook meme that the “National Institutes of Health\u2019s new animal testing policy,\u00a0 ORIVA,” includes “NO phaseout” of animal testing,\u00a0 “NO deadline” for achieving it,\u00a0 and “NO lab $ cut.<\/p>\n “NIH just announced it will prioritize alternatives and ‘aim’ to reduce animal tests,”\u00a0 Bellotti added.\u00a0 “Don\u2019t believe the hype.\u00a0 NIH also said animal experimentation is ‘vital.’\u00a0 ORIVA is just more big government bureaucracy,”\u00a0 Bellotti charged.<\/p>\n Wayne Pacelle.\u00a0 <\/strong><\/em>(Facebook photo)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n By contrast,\u00a0 enthused Animal Wellness Action and Center for a Humane Economy president Wayne Pacelle,\u00a0 after the Bhattacharya announcement, \u00a0but before the Trump administration proposed 2026 budget hit,\u00a0 \u201cThose of us who care about animals will long remember April 2025 as the month when everything began to turn around on the long-standing moral and scientific problems with animal testing and research.\u201d<\/p>\n Pacelle praised \u201cthe agency\u2019s bold plan to favor human-based research technologies over animal use in intramural research, \u00a0NIH-funded extramural studies, \u00a0and basic sciences.<\/p>\n \u201cWe beat on the doors of the Biden Administration and got turned away,\u201d\u00a0 Pacelle recounted on Facebook.\u00a0 \u201cThe FDA fought us every step of the way on efforts to wind down animal testing.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cEven if you dislike the Trump administration, \u201c\u00a0 Pacelle said,\u00a0 \u201cit is a plain truth that the current president’s leaders at Health & Human Services, \u00a0NIH, and FDA have very consciously charted a path to wind down animal testing in the United States. \u00a0This new pathway set out by this administration has the potential to be the greatest animal welfare gain in the last century.\u201d<\/p>\n But not if \u201cthis new pathway\u201d consists only of budget cuts that in effect transfer the bulk of biomedical research to the private sector,\u00a0 specifically pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers,\u00a0 with vastly less governmental supervision from NIH scientific review panels and,\u00a0 due to earlier Trump administration budget cuts, \u00a0a significantly diminished Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service to enforce the Animal Welfare Act.<\/p>\n Humane Society of the U.S. president Kitty Block and Humane Society Legislative Fund president Sara Amundson.<\/strong><\/em> Offered Humane World for Animals president Kitty Block and Humane World for Animals president Sara Amundson,\u00a0 in a jointly signed blog,\u00a0 \u201cIt’s estimated that more than 50 million mice, \u00a0rats, \u00a0dogs, \u00a0cats, \u00a0monkeys, \u00a0rabbits and other animals endure experiments in U.S. laboratories each year. \u00a0The sheer scale of this animal suffering is hard to imagine, \u00a0but thanks to new commitments to phase out animal testing and prioritize replacing animals in research, \u00a0things could soon drastically change.<\/p>\n \u201cLast year,\u201d\u00a0 Block and Amundson recalled,\u00a0 \u201cNIH launched the Complement Animal Research in Experimentation program, \u00a0an ambitious and multifaceted initiative to speed the development, standardization, \u00a0validation, and use of human-based non-animal methods with a dedicated budget of approximately $400 million over ten years.\u201d<\/p>\n What Block and Amundson failed to note is that this project,\u00a0 funded with less than 1% of the total NIH budget,\u00a0 was initiated under the Joseph Biden administration and barely started before the Trump administration took over.\u00a0 It might be subsumed into ORIVA,\u00a0 or might be axed outright by the Trump budget outline.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n The major brake on animal-based research under the Trump budget plan,\u00a0 already put into effect by executive order,\u00a0 is that the “overhead” portion of funding for federal research grants is to be cut from 40% to 15%.\u00a0 “Overhead” is the share of each grant that is used to maintain the facilities and employ the faculty involved in doing the research.<\/p>\n The most expensive part of “overhead” for biomedical research is usually maintaining animal care facilities.\u00a0 Slashing “overhead” by default means favoring non-animal methods,\u00a0 if research is to be done at all.<\/p>\n However,\u00a0 since most federally funded universities already have extensive animal care facilities and animal inventories,\u00a0 what cuts in “overhead” mostly mean in the near future is fewer animal care technicians to look after the animals,\u00a0 project cancellations to enable reductions in animal inventory,\u00a0 and a wave of euthanasias to dispose of animals before cancelled studies are completed.<\/p>\n If and when any of those studies are again funded and resumed,\u00a0 a whole new cadre of animals will have to be acquired and used.\u00a0 That may not happen,\u00a0 but as long as the facilities exist,\u00a0 universities will be looking for ways to use them.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Either gone or consolidated,\u00a0 if the Trump budget proposal is accepted by Congress,\u00a0 would be the National Cancer Institute; \u00a0the National Eye Institute;\u00a0 the National Heart,\u00a0 Lung,\u00a0 & Blood Institute;\u00a0 the National Human Genome Research Institute;\u00a0 the National Institute on Aging;\u00a0 the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism;\u00a0 the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases;\u00a0 the National Institute of Arthritis & Musculoskeletal & Skin Diseases;\u00a0 the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging & Bioengineering;\u00a0 the Eunice Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development;\u00a0 the National Institute on Deafness & Other Communication Disorders;\u00a0 the National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research;\u00a0 the National Institute of Diabetes & Digestive & Kidney Diseases;\u00a0 the National Institute on Drug Abuse;\u00a0 the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences;\u00a0 the National Institute of General Medical Sciences;\u00a0 the National Institute of Mental Health;\u00a0 the National Institute on Minority Health & Health Disparities;\u00a0 the National Institute of Neurological Disorders & Stroke;\u00a0 the National Institute of Nursing Research;\u00a0 and the National Library of Medicine.<\/p>\n (Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Also gone or consolidated would be the NIH Clinical Center;\u00a0 the Center for Information Technology;\u00a0 the Center for Scientific Review;\u00a0 the Fogarty International Center;\u00a0 the National Center for Translational Sciences; \u00a0the National Center for Complementary & Integrative Health;\u00a0 and the National Library of Medicine.<\/p>\n Beth & Merritt Clifton with friends.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Among these six agencies are those most involved in developing and promoting alternatives to animal research.<\/p>\n The post Is NIH under Trump really replacing animal testing, or just axing research?<\/a> appeared first on Animals 24-7<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" (Beth Clifton collage) The Trump budget cuts leave little new funding for “reduction,\u00a0 refinement,\u00a0 & replacement” WASHINGTON D.C.\u2013\u2013Have animal advocates become part of a smokescreen for $18 billion in Donald Trump administration cuts to the National Institutes of Health [NIH] budget? The NIH budget was $48.5 billion in fiscal 2025,\u00a0 but is to be slashed […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":225162,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12022],"tags":[1330,41419,41397,11374,10113,12632,1175],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-225161","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-activist","tag-animal","tag-axing","tag-nih","tag-replacing","tag-research","tag-testing","tag-trump"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Trump budget cuts leave little new funding for “reduction,\u00a0 refinement,\u00a0 & replacement”<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nIt sounded good<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nSugar coating on a poison pill<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nThree news cycles came & went before the real news hit<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nSurvivors<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nPCRM hails formation of ORIVA<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nWhat will ORIVA do?<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nWhite Coast Waste wants ORIVA to be DOA<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n“The month when everything began to turn around”<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nPacelle praises Trump administration<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n
(Beth Clifton collage)<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\nHumane World for Animals also takes the bait<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n“Overhead” cut will do most to reduce animal research<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nAgencies getting either the boot or the ax<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nAlso on the hit list<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nPlease donate to support our work:<\/strong><\/h2>\n
www.animals24-7.org\/donate\/<\/a><\/strong><\/h2>\n