US science under siege as heat deaths mount, Ebola spreads, vaccine trust erodes

The United States marked its 250th birthday this week in a fog of crisis. Wildfires choked Colorado skies so thick that the National Park Service warned a planned fireworks display would create particulate matter at levels one hundred times normal—so the celebration was quietly cancelled. Across the country, at least twenty-five people died in a heat wave. In Europe, the same heat killed thirty-seven hundred. In India, a single day of extreme heat causes roughly thirty-four hundred excess deaths. The World Health Organization and climate scientists are unequivocal: human activity has made these temperatures virtually impossible without deliberate intervention. Yet the Trump Administration's Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, told a conference this week that cold kills more people than heat, and that technology alone will solve the problem. He was wrong on both counts, and the silence from American leadership on climate action is deafening.

But the heat is only one symptom of a deeper crisis in American science. The Office of Management and Budget has proposed sweeping changes to how the federal government funds research—changes that would downgrade peer review, allow political appointees to make final funding decisions, restrict foreign collaboration, and cancel grants deemed misaligned with the administration's priorities. The proposal has drawn nearly fifty thousand public comments, most of them alarmed. One researcher told Science magazine she fears the administration will use new provisions to back lawsuits against scientists based on their personal politics or professional affiliations. The National Science Foundation, dependent on government money, is not waiting for final rules. It has already begun incorporating the OMB requirements into its guidance to grant recipients. Meanwhile, the Department of Agriculture is accelerating the closure of its flagship research campus in Beltsville, Maryland. Bee researchers studying varroa mites were given thirty days to decide whether to relocate to Fargo, North Dakota. The Environmental Protection Agency has restocked its Science Advisory Board with representatives from chemical, pesticide, and energy industries—people with documented histories of downplaying the risks of toxic chemicals. The agency's administrator called this a commitment to "Gold Standard Science." It is not.

The irony is sharp. When the Founding Fathers drafted the Declaration of Independence, five doctors signed it. Congress chartered the National Academy of Sciences in 1863, during the Civil War, because the nation understood that knowledge and scientific progress were essential to democracy. Benjamin Franklin embodied this principle—a man curious about both natural philosophy and political theory. But today, as Science magazine asks, it is hard to see whether the promise of knowledge and education envisioned by the founders is still alive. The scientific community must acknowledge that Americans can be disappointed in how science has served society, but still believe it can be better. That requires committing to what science says it can do and living up to those aspirations in ways that are rigorously documented and provide benefits to all. Australia's Academy of Science is calling for urgent action to restore investment in science. American scientists might take that advice to heart.

Meanwhile, trust in health institutions is collapsing. A global survey across sixteen developed countries found that seven in ten people hold at least one belief contrary to medical science. Thirty-one percent believe childhood vaccines carry more risk than benefit. Twenty-five percent believe vaccines are used for population control. Thirty-two percent think fluoride in water is harmful. Journalists are the least trusted source for health information, but it is disheartening that friends and family are trusted more than global health authorities. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which advises the CDC on vaccine use, has been given a new charter that downplays the importance of vaccine research experience in selecting members and opens the door to vaccine-skeptical appointees. The CDC itself has drawn criticism from public health experts for manufacturing controversy around vaccine safety and effectiveness. Most egregiously, the agency refused to publish research showing that the 2025-2026 COVID-19 booster reduced emergency visits by fifty percent and hospitalizations by fifty-five percent. The study was finally published without CDC authorization in JAMA Network Open. A European study found similar results: the booster reduced symptomatic COVID-19 visits by fifty-nine percent among older adults in the first two months after vaccination. Yet the damage to trust is already done.

There is some good news. The FDA's vaccine advisory committee voted unanimously to recommend Moderna's mRNA influenza vaccine for adults fifty and over. A study in The Lancet reaffirmed that serious side effects from mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are consistently outweighed by protection against severe disease, hospitalization, and death—even for pregnant women and the immunocompromised. mRNA vaccines are faster to produce and easier to customize, which means they hold promise for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and personalized cancer vaccines. But they require ultra-cold storage and are expensive, limiting global access. In Australia, a new deprescribing program called SUPPORT-Meds will help people taper off sleeping pills and reduce prolonged opioid use. The government is funding the training of seven thousand healthcare workers. And in a small victory for public health, the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation has launched Australia's first national bowel cancer screening campaign, targeting people aged forty-five to seventy-four.

The Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo continues. As of July first, the DRC had reported fourteen hundred sixty confirmed cases and four hundred fifty-two deaths. A trial sponsored by the World Health Organization is testing whether the antiviral remdesivir, an experimental antibody treatment, or both together can improve survival. But researchers face deep community mistrust. The healthcare system is overwhelmed, and malaria cases are rising. Uganda has reported an outbreak of Marburg disease in the western part of the country. The United States has committed more than three hundred twenty-seven million dollars in aid and emergency funds. A new advisor to the Health Secretary has been detailed to the White House as Director of the Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response—a position vacant since the Biden administration ended. But there is confusion over who is actually leading the pandemic response. The New England Journal of Medicine reminds us that it has been fifty years since the first recognized Ebola outbreaks in central Africa. The ongoing outbreak is a stark reminder that critical gaps in epidemic preparedness remain.

What comes next is uncertain. The OMB research rules take effect October first. The deadline for public comments is July thirteenth, though advocates hope for an extension. The heat will not break. The virus will not wait. And trust, once lost, takes generations to rebuild.