A medical researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, has lost a significant research grant after using terms related to vaccine hesitancy, a key issue during the Trump administration’s efforts to curb studies on vaccine acceptance.
Nisha Acharya, an ophthalmologist and professor, was shocked to learn that her grant—worth over $600,000—had been abruptly terminated. The funding, which was meant to support her research on the shingles vaccine and its potential to prevent eye-related complications, was revoked after the National Institutes of Health (NIH) flagged her project. Acharya’s work did not focus on vaccine hesitancy, nor did it involve increasing vaccine uptake, but she did use the words “hesitancy” and “uptake” in her grant summary.
Acharya’s research aimed to explore the effectiveness of the shingles vaccine in preventing the painful virus, particularly in how it affects the eyes, a critical issue for patients’ vision. However, her use of these terms—regarded as sensitive in the context of vaccine research—resulted in the cancellation of her five-year grant, leaving her with no funding for her work and placing three of her lab workers’ jobs in jeopardy.
The termination of Acharya’s funding is part of a broader trend that has seen multiple research grants targeted by the Trump administration’s anti-vaccine hesitancy stance. An internal NIH email revealed that dozens of grants focused on understanding vaccine hesitancy and improving vaccine uptake were flagged for cuts or termination.
Acharya, who had dedicated significant time and effort to her research, expressed her frustration, calling the funding cut “devastating.” Her experience underscores the challenges faced by researchers whose work intersects with politically sensitive topics related to vaccine discourse, particularly as public health priorities and government policies clash.
As the debate around vaccine skepticism continues to influence public health initiatives, researchers like Acharya find themselves caught in the crossfire, with their vital work disrupted by political shifts and administrative decisions.
Related topics
