Weekly Update: August 18-22, 2025

​

How Trump is reshaping government data   The Trump administration has influenced data used by researchers, economists and scientists — an effort that drew more attention after the president fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  This seems to be a systemic issue across the federal government, and it is affecting the information systems used to monitor and study addiction-related problems.  Statistics for HIV among transgender people were scrubbed from the CDC website on January 31, as previously reported (CDC site removing HIV-related content amid Trump DEI policy shifts).  HIV advocates have expressed concern that the administration’s anti-DEI efforts will interfere with the CDC’s efforts to combat HIV.

 

In other CDC news, CDC’s Publications On Demand will close in September 2025. The last day for orders was August 15th, 2025.  CDC has offered a broad range of topics that can be ordered or downloaded for free.  Among the top ten downloads were posters about alcohol use during pregnancy. 

 

Mean and Nasty Dept. 

 

Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, sells spirits and wine to residents through 688 stores operated by the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. Last year, the LCBO sold more than $700 million worth of American liquor and wine, sales that have now dwindled to zero...U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra told a conference in Washington state last month that the U.S. booze boycott is one of the reasons Trump and White House officials have called Canada “mean and nasty to deal with.”  Ironically, Republicans are driving a historic low in alcohol consumption  According to a recent Gallup poll, the percentage of Republicans who say they drink alcohol fell from 65% in 2023 to 46% in 2025 — a decline of 19 percentage points.  The change among Democrats was -3%.  And add to that the news that The U.S. Alcohol Industry Is Reeling From Canada’s Booze Boycott  After President Trump initiated a series of trade battles with Canada earlier this year, Canadian provinces, which largely handle alcohol imports and distribution in the country, stopped placing orders for American-made spirits, beer and wine. In liquor stores, clerks pulled U.S. brands off shelves, replacing them with Canadian products.   With the Trump-initiated decline in drinking, the USA may be getting close to the 20% reduction in alcohol per capita that the World Health Organization is recommending.  Maybe Trump should be nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine?

 

Nothing [or Salmonella] Burger Dept. 

 

This week NIH Director, Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D., issued an inane (or is the proper spelling here i-n-s-a-n-e?) memorandum “to clarify our priorities and ensure efforts to fulfill our mission are aligned across the agency.”  At a time when the NIH is issuing directives dealing with censorship of DEI terminology, cancelling grants that were awarded in a highly competitive peer review process just because they deal with diversity, and creating chaos with delays in funding and massive firings of senior leadership, this man sees fit to issue an ambiguous list of priorities that amount to a Nothing Burger, except for the parts where he mentions the ongoing review of grants in terms of “agency priorities” and the review of the entire NIH portfolio to refocus on their distorted top down agenda.  The latter parts amount to a Salmonella Burger.  Below are some of the comments that started to circulate within the ASDN network within minutes of the memo’s posting, and below that is the full text of the memo, along with a few choice comments from ASDN member Tom Babor.

 

DATE: August 15, 2025

 

TO: Institute and Center Directors, Scientific Directors, Clinical Directors, Division Directors, and all Office of the Director Staff

 

FROM: Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D., Director, National Institutes of Health

 

SUBJECT: NIH Priorities and Internal Review of Intramural and Extramural Programs

 

Dear Colleagues:

 

I am sending this memo to clarify our priorities and ensure efforts to fulfill our mission are aligned across the agency. I want to start by expressing my gratitude for your advice and input thus far, and I look forward to our continued collaboration. I have had the opportunity now to visit labs and meet with teams across the agency, and I am constantly impressed. [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: Good to know you are back in the office, and that you were impressed by your tour of all of the damage caused by your RIFs and confusing directives.] It is a privilege to work with such a dedicated and talented staff. 

 

I recognize that several new initiatives and policies have been implemented in a short period of time, and there has been some confusion due to inaccurate media reports and rumors.  [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: Given the confusion, fear and intimidation caused by the DOGE fiasco and your inability to communicate a coherent plan to guide the personnel and policy changes at NIH, we were wondering where the hell you were, Jay. Despite the rumors, those inaccurate media reports proved to be remarkably accurate.] Therefore, I have outlined select agency priorities at the end of this note to ensure you have a clearer picture of our rationale and objectives. I do not mean this memo to be an exhaustive list of all agency priorities, but rather a select list of topics that require our particular attention and focus while continuing the other important work you are all doing. This memo will help to ensure NIH supports only high-quality projects selected based on the merit of the science [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: Isn’t this what the NIH has been doing since its inception?] and that are aligned with our mission to generate data that can improve the health of all of the American people. I ask each of you to use this guidance when reviewing your intramural and extramural research portfolios and making decisions about your future programs. 

 

In recent weeks, it has come to my attention that some at NIH and in the scientific community believe that there are “banned words” or some level of censorship of science ongoing or planned. This is simply untrue. [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: 

Thanks Jay. Does this mean we can re-populate our redacted websites with the following words, which seem to have disappeared inexplicably from our grant applications and grant awards? Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI): These words have been erased from multiple agency documents, including those related to hiring and education programs. Climate change and climate crisis: Some environmental agencies have been told to use more neutral terms like “environmental challenges.” LGBTQ+ terms: Websites mentioning LGBTQ+ history and rights have been edited, especially within the National Park Service and the Department of Health and Human Services. Systemic racism and social justice] I have advocated for academic freedom throughout my career, with a particular public focus in the last five years. My position has not changed; scientists must be allowed to pursue their ideas free of censorship or control by others. They must be able to express their scientific opinions and challenge scientific dogma. This does not mean everything scientists want to do can or will be funded, but rather that they will be free to propose and discuss these ideas freely in public scientific debate.

 

The NIH is committed to this. We have already taken steps in this direction by taking scientific review out of the ICs and moving it into the agnostic Center for Scientific Review, minimizing the possibility of gatekeeping within an institute or center. In the coming weeks, we will be taking further steps with an intramural academic freedom policy, and we have formed working groups to evaluate and change how notices of funding for extramural programs are designed and grants are funded to allow for more of a bottom-up research approach.

 

These changes will allow the scientific community to drive science in a field rather than the government dictating what should be done. [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: This is great, Jay! Great to hear that addiction science will be getting government off of its back. By the way, what about Trump’s Executive Order “stopping unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from wasting taxpayer dollars on frivolous grants.” According to one interpretation of this EO, the Trump executive order gives politicians control over all federal grants, alarming researchers “Going forward, President Trump’s appointees will review funding opportunity announcements and grant awards to verify that each grant dollar benefits Americans instead of lining grantees’ pocketbooks or furthering causes that damage America.” Pardon me Jay, but who the hell are these Trump appointees? Will Big Balls be called in for a special assignment?] They will create an environment that allows for the increased diversity of thought in every field, more opportunities for new or previously sidelined investigators, and expansion of the scientific enterprise into previously unexplored areas. The result will be breakthroughs that really can make America healthy again.

 

We must continue to ensure our research and training programs are free from fraud, abuse, duplication, and are implemented and administered in a manner consistent with federal law. [ASDN Tom Barbor comment: Good to hear, Jay! Just to let you know, in the 50+ years I worked on NIH grants from NIAAA and NIDA, I never encountered any fraud or abuse. There once was a situation during the height of the Cold War when the NIAAA official I was travelling with brought a suitcase full of canned food for the people working at the All-Union Research Center in Moscow. He knew they were starving cause their economy had collapsed. This may have violated federal law, just to let you know if you want to take action!] The NIH is powered by public funds. It is our job to ensure we are good stewards of taxpayer money and create a high return on investment by improving the health of all Americans. Many people across the country have lost trust in NIH because they no longer believe we are working in their best interests. The reforms we’re implementing aim to repair this trust. Academic freedom, scientific integrity, transparency, and accountability—gold-standard science – will continue to guide our approach.

 

Thank you for your efforts and dedication to the great mission of NIH.

 

All the best,

Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D.

Director of the National Institutes of Health

 

EDITOR’S NOTE:  The above cover letter was followed by a more detailed set of new NIH research priorities, which included training, reproducibility, nutrition, artificial intelligence, autism, and health outcomes.  On the surface, cutting-edge areas of interest and careful attention to scientific integrity? But where is treatment and prevention, and where do addictions science and practice fit?

 

Here are some comments about the research priority list, from ASDN’s own Denni Downer 😉:

• He refers to not discriminating against anyone. But what we know he is implying, based on actions, is the absence of any efforts to train and provide opportunities to minority groups that have been, heretofore, discriminated against!

• This real-world data infrastructure could also be a can of worms. Think of all these DOGE kids that now have access to all sorts of PII!

• And of course we know what the plan is for research on autism, a gap and approach entirely contrived by RFK Jr.

• He makes his aversion to animal models clear.  We would not be where we are today without them, although I’d really like to see more protections in place.

• We also know how the administration plans to approach diversity in studies, which is alluded to here but not in a way that the general public could understand the actual implications.

• It’s also clear that they want to curtail funds for “foreign institutions”.

• It really bothers me how he is pathologizing sexual orientation, referring to its manifestations as dysphoria, disorder, and incongruence in almost a disease or defect perspective. Studies have already been terminated that view transgender as a normal orientation and how discrimination against these groups has led to poor outcomes. The contrast between viewing the individual as defective as opposed to the societal response as defective is stark.

​

There is also this inexplicable inconsistency between the plan to move all grant decisions to CSR and the dictate for NIH program to review all current and planned research activities and determine compliance with these priorities. Who, in effect, will be making the decisions?

 

THIS-JUST-IN DEPT.  NIH chief orders immediate review of all research, cuts loom  After issuing the above-mentioned memo on a busy news weekend, on the same day the NIH Director, Jayanta Bhattacharya, called on the agency’s scientific leadership to immediately review all of their current and planned research activities to identify those that don’t align with agency priorities.  Activities that don’t align with those priorities may be restricted, paused, not renewed or terminated.  Addiction science is not listed as a priority.  How many NIDA and NIAAA grants are going to be restricted, paused, not renewed or terminated?

 

Trump is Attempting to End Standards of Care for Immigrant Children in Detention  And while we are piling on, let’s not overlook or underplay the conditions under which immigrant children are detained. Denni recently published an op-ed on the impacts of separations from parents in The Hill. We must not let our guard down or give up. Let your voices be heard!