US scientific ‘brain drain’ under Trump stalled superbug research

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a warning in April 2025 regarding antibiotic-resistant "superbugs" that cause more than 3 million infections and 48,000 deaths annually in the United States.

Globally, these pathogens contribute to nearly 5 million deaths each year. Despite the growing threat, the fight against antimicrobial resistance faces significant hurdles following billions of dollars in research budget cuts under the Trump administration.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation have seen nearly 8,000 grants canceled, while more than 1,000 NIH employees have been dismissed.

Young scientists have been disproportionately affected. Hiring freezes and funding shortages have left many unable to establish laboratories or find stable employment, leading to the formation of a new union at the NIH with nearly 5,000 members.

The federal workforce lost more than 10,000 postdoctoral science experts last year, according to the journal Science. This "brain drain" is driving researchers like Emma Bay Dickinson to seek opportunities in Europe, sparking fears over the future of American scientific leadership.

The Trump administration’s aggressive retrenchment of federal science funding represents more than a mere fiscal adjustment; it is a calculated strategic pivot that threatens to dismantle the United States’ long-standing global leadership in innovation. The scale of the proposed cuts—totaling billions of dollars and jeopardizing thousands of positions—signals a profound retreat from basic research, the institutional bedrock of American economic dynamism and public health security.

The most corrosive impact, however, is structural. The exodus of early-career researchers, exemplified by scientists such as Ian Morgan and Emma Dickinson, suggests the U.S. is not merely losing individual talent but is effectively hollowing out its intellectual capital for the next generation. This nascent "brain drain" to Europe serves as a clear market signal that the American R&D ecosystem is losing its competitive edge. If left unaddressed, this attrition will leave the U.S. sidelined in high-stakes races to develop next-generation antibiotics, pandemic-ready vaccines, and frontier oncology treatments.

Furthermore, the administration’s reported imposition of ideological litmus tests—specifically the restriction of terms such as "climate change" and "vaccine" within grant proposals—marks a dangerous escalation in the politicization of federal science. When political orthodoxy supersedes objective inquiry, it does more than just stifle progress; it erodes the public’s institutional trust in the scientific enterprise. The unprecedented move toward unionization at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a predictable market reaction to this instability, as the scientific community shifts from passive observation to active mobilization in defense of the sector's integrity.

Budget cuts and hiring freezes across the U.S. scientific landscape are creating immediate challenges for Vietnamese students and researchers. For those who came here to pursue STEM degrees with the goal of working at world-class institutions like the NIH, the path to securing a job and a high-skilled H-1B visa has become significantly more difficult. Furthermore, as the scientific environment becomes increasingly politicized and policies targeting diversity gain traction, many in our community are feeling less welcome. This shift is prompting current and future Vietnamese scientists to weigh their options elsewhere—whether that means heading to Canada or Australia, or ultimately returning to Vietnam.