The Trump NIH animal research move is not about organoids, or animals. It's about politics, and it’s out of the Project 2025 playbook.

The Trump #NIH move to push to end realistic biology research (animal research) is not about organoids. Nor is it about models. Nor in fact research. This is merely an effort to destroy American science and universities. Animal research policy is a useful tool in that destruction, because it is a political wedge issue.

We’ve heard confused questions from scientists: “But Kristi Noem killed her dog, and Republicans seemed not to care!” Exactly. Trump and his people don’t care about animals. They are, however, willing to exploit this issue to gain political advantage.

Russell Vought and the Project 2025 people handed this new policy down to NIH. It’s not from science or scientists. There was a non-animal model (NAM) working group last year at NIH, and we have heard from internal sources that this group was not consulted in the new Trump policy effort. If Trump people wanted to improve science; to find ways to continue cancer cures with realistic biological studies, they’d have talked to scientists.

But that’s not the goal.

The Project 2025 people don’t care about animals; they just want to use animals as a wedge issue to destroy NIH and universities.

The MAGA right has been funding anti-animal research work for years

This anti-animal research effort builds on efforts from a Republican organization called "White Coat Waste" (WCW). WCW shared donors and staff with Heritage, the major Project 2025 thinktank.

Back in 2018, the Knight Foundation science-and-society site Undark published a piece on WCW, titled "A conservative strategist seeks to end government funding for research involving animal subjects." Here’s a key passage.

Anthony Bellotti [the founder, is] a conservative political consultant who is adept at social media campaigns, at ease with the press, and fluent in the language of small-government politics. Bellotti worked on campaigns to defund Planned Parenthood, the women’s reproductive rights nonprofit, and to end Barack Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act.

But his current effort, called the White Coat Waste Project … aims to stop government-funded animal research.

Oh, a conservative political consultant, working with Heritage, pushes anti-animal research campaigns with the goal of stopping government-funded research? That sounds quite a lot like what is happening at the Trump NIH right now.

Corruption by selection

Nicole Kleinstreuer, the Trump selection to run this effort to cut realistic biological science, may well not be corrupt; she may well be entirely sincere.

The problem is that of all the NIH scientists, Russell Vought found someone who wants to stop animal research — a politically useful take for Vought and Republicans — and elevated that person into a Deputy Director position. (Kleinstreuer’s bio on Twitter says “Career dedicated to reducing & replacing animal testing.”) Same situation with Matt Memoli; he may also be sincere but he was elevated way up the chain because he is anti-DEI and a COVID denier or contrarian.

This is corruption by selection.

We're not saying she's corrupt. But the system that elevated her certainly is. She wouldn't be in that chair if she didn't hold those views.

Political wedge issues: a summary

How do political wedge issues work? They are just about finding something that scientists or the Democratic coalition argue about, something that splits the anti-Trump side. Animal stuff does that. It draws some fraction of the public in, and draws sympathy. Justifiably so. We should want to reduce animal research as much as we possibly can and still allow new cancer cures to be unlocked.

Scientists too want to reduce animals in research as much as they can, and study animals only when realistic biology is absolutely needed. It’s a wedge issue because scientists and the public do not have unified views on animal research — unlike things like destruction of NIH, mass firings, or fascism, which scientists are universally opposed to.

Since this issue splits our side, Russell Vought grabbed onto it. That’s the same reason rightwing donors to Heritage and WCW like the issue and fund it. The Trump animal research policy was probably workshopped in a thinktank like Heritage in 2022 or so. (Side note: check out these Vought speeches from 2022 and 2023. He told us what he’d do; let’s take Republicans seriously next time.)

Vought promoted Nicole Kleinstreuer WAY up the ladder, to be his wedge aimed at real science, and now Vought is jamming her policies into science to damage us. That's the way political wedge issues work.

Animal research — valuable research into realistic biology — is a political weapon for Trump. Let's all be aware of that agenda.