The Trump administration has significantly reduced funding for research on L.G.B.T.Q. health by canceling over $800 million in grants, impacting studies on diseases such as cancers and sexually transmitted infections that disproportionately affect sexual and gender minority groups. This move aligns with the administration's opposition to diversity programs and gender-affirming care, and has affected institutions like Johns Hopkins, Columbia, and many public universities. The cuts have sparked criticism from scientists who argue that it creates a hierarchy of patients and constitutes scientific bigotry, as it sidelines research aimed at addressing health disparities. The legality of these terminations is being challenged in court, and there are concerns about the broader implications for public health, as well as the future of L.G.B.T.Q. research. With additional proposals to reduce the N.I.H. budget, the infrastructure supporting medical research in the United States faces a potential dismantling, affecting not only L.G.B.T.Q. health but also the wider research landscape.

The Trump administration's decision to cancel over $800 million in N.I.H. grants has primarily targeted research on L.G.B.T.Q. health, which had been growing over the past decade with support from the Obama administration. Nearly half of the 669 grants canceled as of early May were related to L.G.B.T.Q. health, affecting research on cancers, sexually transmitted infections, and other health issues prevalent among sexual and gender minority groups.

Federal officials justified the cuts by stating that the research no longer aligned with agency priorities, often criticizing the studies as being based on gender identity and lacking scientific rigor. This has resulted in the elimination of projects aimed at preventing H.I.V. in adolescents, and addressing mental health issues and antibiotic resistance in L.G.B.T.Q. populations.

Major research institutions, including Johns Hopkins, Columbia, Florida State University, and public universities like Ohio State University and the University of Alabama at Birmingham, have been affected by the funding cuts. These cancellations have led to job losses and halted the expansion of labs focused on L.G.B.T.Q. research.

Scientists argue that the funding cuts create a hierarchy of patients, treating sexual and gender minority groups as less deserving of research attention. The termination of grants has been described as bigotry in science, as it undermines efforts to address health disparities and improve outcomes for marginalized communities.

Legal challenges have been mounted against the grant terminations, with lawsuits arguing that the administration failed to provide a legal rationale for the cuts. Meanwhile, there is concern that the reduction in research funding will reverse progress made in combating diseases like H.I.V., and that the dismantling of research infrastructure could have long-term negative impacts on public health.

The proposed reduction of the N.I.H. budget from $48 billion to $27 billion further threatens the future of medical research in the United States. Critics argue that the dismantling of L.G.B.T.Q. research programs not only harms sexual and gender minority groups but also poses broader public health risks, as it limits the understanding and treatment of diseases that can affect the entire population.

The cuts have had a chilling effect on the field of L.G.B.T.Q. research, with younger researchers losing jobs and distancing themselves from the field to avoid political repercussions. The move to end specialized programs, such as a suicide hotline for L.G.B.T.Q. youth, signals a broader retreat from addressing the health needs of minority communities.