It is easy to tut-tut those doing what you oppose. There are bad actors, sure, but what should Harvard do, what should Columbia have done? Can you game this out and show a better way? Is ending these institution the best way through sheer defiance? If it isn’t what is the right direction?

The villain here is Trump, not Columbia. Don’t forget it.

Neither Columbia. Had to settle for NYU.

Shouldn’t you be demanding answers from DOGE? Please do.

I’m not a lawyer, but wouldn’t that be entrapment?

What does it mean to “order search for measles treatments”? Who is he ordering? Don’t we have a large number of highly trained research scientists paid to be at work at the most pressing medical problems? Oh wait..that was 2024. But really, who and what was he ordering?

Has anyone considered the Jewish scientists getting their science projects cancelled in all this at Columbia? Among so many others for whom politics was not on their agenda. And their careers are stifled and the US is missing out on cancer cures and military might and many other things.

The science headlines for a good few weeks in Feb-March in the NYT and elsewhere were about a 30 minute method fro cooking an egg “optimized by science”. Several of my professor colleagues were enamored by this and shared it widely. what next, clearly not that…..?

We have many rules about safety, compliance, and auditing, for example. Not sure how Canada works. But even if costs are excessive, don’t we need common sense reform, not cutting off everything effective yesterday? Doing that just destroys research in progress and doesn’t get to any real issues.

The new NIH memo is directly illegal democrats-appropriations.house.gov/news/press-r...

No, it does not mean becoming more conservative about what projects to pursue. It means just not doing research. 15% isn’t enough to keep the lights on, so these contracts become a loss. Thus, we end our projects and stop creating new knowledge and cures. Full stop.