随着特朗普对哈佛的攻击势头增强，研究人员纷纷表示：“每个人都能看出端倪”

【中美创新时报2025 年 5 月7 日编译讯】（记者温友平编译）哈佛大学面临的价值 90 亿美元的生存问题：除非哈佛遵守白宫的要求，否则它将不会获得任何新的联邦研究资助。由于资金冻结而受到威胁的研究项目包括一项耗资 1200 万美元的预防项目，该项目研究 800 名婴儿的致命食物过敏。对此，《波士顿环球报》记者布鲁克·豪瑟作了下述报道。

如果没有联邦政府几十年来为其庞大的研究计划提供的资金，哈佛大学将会变成什么样子？

这是特朗普政府在与哈佛大学对抗中发出的最新威胁之后，哈佛大学面临的价值 90 亿美元的生存问题：除非哈佛遵守白宫的要求，否则它将不会获得任何新的联邦研究资助。

这是哈佛大学受联邦政府资助的研究工作在短短几个月内第二次中断。今年 4 月，哈佛大学表示不会同意白宫对从招聘和招生实践到涉及国际学生的纪律问题等各方面的一系列要求，随后联邦政府冻结了 22 亿美元的资助。

哈佛医学院博士后研究员亚当·西克拉 (Adam Sychla) 所在的团队正在开发可编程疗法，用于治疗从癌症到普通感冒等各种疾病，他说：“现在的问题不是研究以前已经获得资助的项目，而是我们需要找到资金来再次资助同一项研究。”

“这会减缓研究进度，这意味着我们开发的任何技术都需要更长的时间才能惠及大众，”Sychla 补充道，“而这最终是为了公众而存在的。”

周一，教育部长琳达·麦克马洪在致哈佛大学校长艾伦·加伯的信中披露了最新的拨款削减措施。麦克马洪在5月5日的信中写道：“哈佛大学不应该再向联邦政府寻求拨款，因为联邦政府不会提供任何拨款。”她还列举了“哈佛大学本科和研究生院中丑陋的种族主义”等一系列“违规行为”。

特朗普最近就未来拨款发出的最后通牒虽然并不令人意外，但仍让哈佛社区的许多人措手不及。正如总统最近在其“真相社交”平台上所写，他此前也曾推动取消哈佛的免税地位，“如果哈佛继续宣扬政治、意识形态和恐怖主义煽动/支持的‘病态’？”

哈佛医学院系统生物学专业五年级博士生 Rachel Petherbridge 致力于改善妊娠期糖尿病的治疗效果，她将持续存在的资金威胁比作“一列缓慢行驶的火车”。

“就像我们坐在铁轨上，看着火车缓缓向我们驶来，”她说。最近一次威胁发生在周一，火车突然“猛地向前冲去”。

同样糟糕的是，白宫发布的直截了当的法令似乎没有任何上诉的余地，从而引发了混乱。

佩瑟布里奇说：“我不能过分强调这一切对每个人来说是多么不透明。”

教育部没有回应置评请求。

校园里的许多研究人员已经因四月份的资金冻结而感到不安，一些人不得不努力寻找其他资金来源。

公共卫生学院教授卡里·C·纳多(Kari C. Nadeau)的一项针对濒死食物过敏的研究即将终止，该研究涉及全美800多名高危婴儿。“我们正在进行一项预防性试验，在婴儿皮肤上使用一种天然物质，”她说，并指出目前还有四项介入性临床研究，旨在治疗同样面临风险的濒死食物过敏儿童和成人。

她还没有告诉参与者；她自己还在消化这个消息。

“资金已经被冻结了，”纳多说。“这已经影响到患者的安全和研究的伦理行为。我们不得不终止试验，这让患者面临风险。而且这些都是癌症试验，都是帕金森症等关键领域的试验。”

一项为期七年的研究在第五年就停止，也会产生经济成本：“我会损失1200万美元，”纳多说，“而且慈善捐款也不够弥补这些缺口。绝对不行。而且我只是一个人。”

其他人包括 Sychla 和他的同事以及校园里的研究人员，他们都在追逐有限的私人资金来源。

“这意味着，争取相同数额的资金的竞争将会更加激烈，也就意味着人们将无法获得这些资金，”塞奇拉说道。他希望哈佛大学集团能够动用其500多亿美元的捐赠基金中的一部分来支持研究，但他指出，从长远来看，这几乎不是一个可行的替代方案。

“现实情况是，研究成本高昂，”塞赫拉说。科学家需要尖端设备来不断探究“最重要的问题”，比如蛋白质的形状是什么？为了找到答案，“你需要使用电子显微镜，”他说，而电子显微镜需要一间独立的房间，并且妥善维护才能正常工作。它成本高昂——“而且我们有必要了解某些疾病是如何发生的。”

哈佛大学心理学教授史蒂芬·平克表示，麦克马洪的信错误地暗示“联邦政府以某种方式补贴哈佛大学”。

他表示，事实上，研究经费本质上是“一份向国家提供服务的合同”。声称哈佛大学可以用自己的捐赠基金来补贴研究，“就像说一家大型公路承包商可以用自己的盈余来补贴修建州际公路一样，”他补充道。“这不是慈善，而是按服务收费。”

此外，所有工作岗位都岌岌可危。周二，哥伦比亚大学宣布裁员近180名由联邦研究经费支付工资的员工。

佩瑟布里奇在哈佛大学附属麻省总医院的校外实验室工作，因此她认为目前她的资金更安全。但作为哈佛大学研究生会的首席管理者，她担心如果联邦政府的资金继续冻结或终止，将对自己和他人产生影响。

“我不认为工资会断发，但最终会断发的。人们会被解雇，”她说。

她补充道：“人们仍在努力工作，因为他们真的关心科学。”

但对未来以及哈佛大学自身定位的不确定性依然挥之不去。平克说，关闭哈佛的科研能力，实际上就是“把它变成一所文理学院”。

在冻结期间，一些研究人员正在加拿大和欧洲寻找机会，而其他人则以不同的方式撰写资助申请书——避免使用“生物多样性”等词语，因为“多样性”一词已被政府标记。

“现在有一种恐惧文化，”佩瑟布里奇说。“每个人都能看出不祥之兆。”

虽然特朗普政府显然试图惩罚哈佛大学拒绝屈服，但纳多质疑白宫是否能够完全理解其行为对校园以外的人们产生了怎样的影响，例如 800 名患有危险食物过敏的婴儿。

“他们是否知道，他们已经终止了针对这种常见、几乎致命、影响到所有人的疾病的儿童和家庭的试验？”纳多问道。

由于哈佛大学主导这项研究，此次冻结也影响到全国各地的合作临床试验。“这将切断芝加哥、辛辛那提、丹佛和斯坦福大学的临床试验，”她说。

她强调，目前有 800 名婴儿处于危险之中。

“实际上，我们招募的所有人都是在新冠疫情期间完成的，”她在谈到参与者时说道。“我们挺过了疫情，这真是太棒了。但我们没法熬过这场疫情。”

题图：四月，一名行人经过哈佛医学院。 图片：Craig F. Walker/《环球邮报》员工

附原英文报道：

As Trump attacks on Harvard gain momentum, researchers scramble: ‘Everyone can read the writing on the wall’

Among threatened research projects due to funding freeze is a $12 million prevention program studying near-fatal food allergies in 800 infants

By Brooke Hauser Globe Staff,Updated May 6, 2025

A pedestrian passed Harvard Medical School in April.Craig F. Walker/Globe Staff

What would Harvard University be without the money the federal government has provided over decades to underwrite its vast research initiatives?

That’s the existential, $9 billion question facing the Harvard community after the Trump administration’s most recent threat in its confrontation with the university: Harvard will not receive any new federal research grants unless and until it complies with White House demands.

This is the second disruption to federally funded research work at Harvard in as many months, following a freeze of $2.2 billion in April after the university said it would not agree to a raft of White House demands on everything from hiring and admissions practices to disciplinary matters involving international students.

“Instead of working on things that had previously been funded, now it’s a question of, OK, we need to find money to fund that same research for the second time,” said Adam Sychla, a Harvard Medical School postdoctoral research fellow working on a team developing programmable treatments for everything from cancer to the common cold.

“It slows down research progress, which means that any of the technologies we develop are going to take longer to come to people,” Sychla added, “which is who it’s ultimately for — it’s for the public.”

As Trump battles elite colleges, House GOP looks to hike endowment tax by at least tenfold

On Monday, Education Secretary Linda McMahon disclosed the latest cutoff in a letter to Harvard president Alan Garber. “Harvard should no longer seek GRANTS from the federal government, since none will be provided,” McMahon wrote in the May 5 letter, citing “ugly racism in its undergraduate and graduate schools” as being among a long list of “violations.”

Trump’s latest ultimatum about future grants, while not exactly a surprise, still caught many in the Harvard community off guard. The president has also previously pushed to end Harvard’s tax-exempt status “if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting “Sickness?,” as he wrote recently on his Truth Social platform.

Rachel Petherbridge, a fifth-year PhD candidate in systems biology at Harvard Medical School working on improving outcomes for gestational diabetes, likened the ongoing funding threats to “a slow-moving train.”

“It’s like we’re just sitting on the tracks, watching this train inch towards us,” she said. With the most recent threats on Monday, the train suddenly “jerked forward.”

Just as bad is the confusion the White House has triggered with blunt edicts that seem to leave no room for appeal.

“I cannot overemphasize how opaque all of this is to everybody,” said Petherbridge.

The Department of Education did not respond to requests for comment.

Many researchers on campus were already reeling from the freeze in April that forced some to scramble to find alternative sources of funds.

Kari C. Nadeau, a professor at the school of public health, is facing the termination of a study looking at near-fatal food allergies that involves over 800 high-risk infants across the United States. “We were doing a preventative trial to use a natural substance on the skin of infants,” she said, noting there are four other interventional clinical studies for therapy in children and adults with near-fatal food allergies that are also at risk.

She hasn’t told the participants yet; she’s still absorbing the news herself.

“You already have funds frozen,” said Nadeau. “They’re already affecting patient safety and the ethical conduct of research. We have had to terminate trials, and that puts patients at risk. And these are cancer trials. These are trials in really critical areas like Parkinson’s.”

There’s also a financial cost of stopping a seven-year study in its fifth year: “I will lose $12 million,” Nadeau said, “and there will not be enough money from philanthropy to fill in the gaps. Absolutely not. And I’m just one person.”

Others include Sychla and his colleagues and researchers across campus, all out there chasing a limited source of private funding.

“That means the competition for the same amount of funding is going to be much higher, which means people are not going to find that funding,” Sychla said. He’s hopeful the Harvard Corporation would use some of the university’s $50-plus billion endowment to support research, but noted it’s hardly a viable replacement long term.

“The reality is, research is expensive,” Sychla said. Scientists need cutting-edge equipment to keep asking “the biggest questions,” like what is the shape of a protein? To find out, “You need to use an electron microscope,” he said, which requires a room of its own, properly maintained, to function. It is costly — “and it is necessary for us to learn how certain diseases happen.”

Harvard psychology professor Steven Pinker said McMahon’s letter falsely implies “that somehow the federal government subsidizes Harvard.”

In truth, he said, research grants are essentially “a contract for services rendered to the country.” Claiming Harvard could subsidize research from its own endowment is “kind of like saying a large highway contractor could subsidize building an interstate from its own surplus,” he added. “It’s not charity. It’s fee for service.”

And then there are all the jobs at stake. On Tuesday, Columbia University announced layoffs of nearly 180 people whose salaries were funded by federal research money.

Petherbridge works at an off-campus lab with the Harvard-affiliated Massachusetts General Hospital, so believes her funding is safer — for now. But as chief steward for the Harvard Graduate Students Union, she’s worried about implications for herself and others should federal funding remain frozen or simply end.

“I don’t think paychecks have stopped coming, but eventually they will. People will be laid off,” she said.

“People are still trying to work because [they] really care about the science,” she added.

But there’s no escaping the feeling of uncertainty about the future — and about Harvard’s very identity. Shutting down the university’s scientific research capabilities, Pinker said, would effectively “turn it into a liberal arts college.”

And amid the freeze, some researchers are looking to Canada and Europe for opportunities, while others are writing their grants differently — avoiding words such as “biodiversity” because the word “diversity” has been flagged by the administration.

“There’s a culture of fear,” Petherbridge said. “Everyone can read the writing on the wall.”

While it’s clear the Trump administration is trying to punish Harvard for refusing to yield, Nadeau questioned if the White House can fully grasp how its actions have affected people well beyond campus, such as the 800 infants with dangerous food allergies.

“Do they know that they have terminated these trials in children and families of such a common, near-fatal disease that affects everyone across nonpartisan lines?” Nadeau asked.

Since Harvard is leading the research, the freeze also affects cooperating clinical trials across the country. “It’s going to cut off the clinical trial in Chicago, in Cincinnati, in Denver, at Stanford,” she said.

She underscored that 800 infants are now in the balance.

“We actually recruited everyone through COVID,” she said of the participants. “The fact that we got through COVID is amazing. But we can’t get through this.”