Context:

The National Institutes of Health (N.I.H.) has announced a new policy prohibiting American scientists from using federal funds to support international research collaborators, casting uncertainty on studies addressing global health issues like malaria and childhood cancer. This policy change, driven by concerns about lax reporting and tracking of funds highlighted by the Government Accountability Office, will also extend to domestic subawards in the future. The decision has been met with criticism from the scientific community, which argues that international collaboration is essential for addressing complex global health challenges efficiently. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the N.I.H. director, emphasized that projects must justify their necessity overseas and benefit the American public, otherwise risking termination. Although existing foreign subawards will not be retroactively halted, new awards proposing foreign subawards will no longer be approved, potentially delaying critical research and development of treatments for diseases prevalent outside the U.S.

Dive Deeper:

• The National Institutes of Health (N.I.H.) has banned American scientists from directing its funding to foreign partners, impacting research on diseases like malaria and childhood cancer that require international collaboration to study effectively.

• The policy shift results from Government Accountability Office reports criticizing inadequate monitoring and reporting of international subawards, which have led to trust and security concerns within the U.S. biomedical research enterprise.

• Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the N.I.H. director, stated that only projects that cannot be conducted elsewhere and benefit the American public will continue to receive support, otherwise they face potential closure.

• Scientific and medical research advocates argue that global collaborations are crucial for addressing complex questions and facilitating faster clinical trials, especially for rare diseases requiring a large number of subjects.

• The new policy does not retroactively affect existing foreign subawards but forbids future awards that propose foreign subawards, raising concerns about delays in research and treatment developments for global health issues.

• Despite the policy's intent to improve oversight, it has been criticized for potentially hindering essential international research collaborations, which are necessary for tackling diseases not prevalent in the U.S.

• The N.I.H. continues to face challenges in tracking international spending due to federal policies that exempt smaller subawards from reporting, contributing to incomplete and sometimes inaccurate data.