The statement that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a political "scam" and should be defunded is a subject of intense public and political debate, with strong arguments both for and against the agency's funding and structure. 

Arguments for Defunding or Reforming the NIH

  • Misuse of Funds and Overhead Costs: Critics point to instances of financial misuse or fraud at institutions receiving grants, leading to millions in refunds to the NIH. Concerns have been raised that a significant portion of the NIH's budget, approximately $9 billion annually, goes toward "indirect costs" or administrative overhead at universities and research institutions rather than directly to research, which some argue is a waste of taxpayer money.

  • Bureaucracy and Inefficiency: Some argue the grant-making process is a "cumbersome bureaucratic process that encourages mediocrity" and does not prioritize the most groundbreaking science.

  • Political Influence on Research: There are concerns that funding decisions have become politically motivated, with recent administrations directing cuts to specific areas like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) research, or projects involving specific diseases like sickle cell, leading to lawsuits and disrupting valuable scientific work.

  • Lack of Accountability: An audit by the HHS Office of Inspector General found that most institutions receiving funds did not fully understand or comply with requirements for reporting monetary donations from outside sources, suggesting a lack of robust oversight. 

Arguments Against Defunding and in Support of the NIH

  • Life-Saving Research: The NIH is the world's largest public funder of biomedical research and is credited with significant medical progress, including a 34% drop in the age-adjusted cancer death rate in the U.S. between 1991 and 2022. Many individuals, including former NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli, state they would not be alive today without the research the NIH funds.

  • Economic Driver: Research funded by the NIH generates substantial economic activity. In 2024, every $1 of NIH funding generated an estimated $2.56 in economic activity across the U.S., supporting jobs at universities, hospitals, and medical centers.

  • Threat to Global Leadership: Medical and scientific organizations, such as the American Medical Association (AMA), argue that slashing the NIH's budget would jeopardize the nation's ability to find new cures and cede its global leadership in biomedical research and discovery to other nations.

  • Necessity of Indirect Costs: Research institutions argue that indirect costs are real, documented expenses necessary for lab operations, maintenance, equipment, and administration, and that capping these rates below actual costs forces them to cut research programs or staff. 

Ultimately, the debate involves complex issues of financial oversight, research priorities, and the role of government in scientific advancement, with recent events involving the abrupt termination of grants intensifying the controversy. 

  • Funding and Defunding of NIH Research Should Be Based on Real ...

    Oct 8, 2025 — Funding and Defunding of NIH Research Should Be Based on Real Science and Not Politics or Amorphous Constructs.

    National Institutes of Health (.gov)

  • Most Institutions That Received NIH Funding Did Not Fully ... - OIG

    Apr 2, 2025 — What OIG Found. Just 19 percent of institutions correctly identified all scenarios in our survey that described monetar...

    Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (.gov)

  • Funding and Defunding of NIH Research Should Be Based on ...

    and leadership of the Depart- ment of Health and Human Services (HHS) have dramatically redefined what is considered allowable and...

    American Journal of Public Health