In a controversial move, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has announced an end to federal funding for research projects involving human fetal tissue obtained from elective abortions. This decision, implemented under the Trump administration, marks a significant shift in the agency’s stance on a longstanding and ethically complex issue.
The NIH, the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research, has historically supported studies utilizing fetal tissue to advance understanding and treatment of a wide range of diseases, including diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and infertility. Additionally, fetal tissue has played a crucial role in the development and production of vaccines for polio, hepatitis A, rabies, and other illnesses.
However, the NIH’s new directive, effective immediately, aims to “modernize” the agency’s approach by investing in “breakthrough technologies more capable of modeling human health and disease,” according to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya. The decision has been praised by anti-abortion advocates who have long opposed the use of fetal tissue from elective abortions for research purposes.
While the NIH will no longer fund projects involving fetal tissue from elective abortions, researchers will still be able to utilize tissue obtained from miscarriages, known as “spontaneous” abortions. Nonetheless, scientists typically prefer to work with tissue from elective abortions, as material from miscarriages can be compromised by genetic or chromosomal abnormalities and is often more challenging to collect.
The move marks the latest and most dramatic effort by the Trump administration to limit research that utilizes fetal tissue from abortions, a goal long sought by anti-abortion groups. In 2019, the NIH halted internal research involving fetal tissue and implemented a review committee to evaluate proposals from outside scientists, a policy that was later reversed by the Biden administration in 2021.
The NIH’s decision has sparked concerns among the scientific community, who argue that the ban on fetal tissue research could hinder critical advancements in medical understanding and treatment. As the debate over the ethical and scientific implications of this policy change continues, the impact on future biomedical research remains to be seen.
