The Trump administration marked a significant shift by halting over $1 million in funding for a research study on hormone therapy’s overdose risks in rats, sparking debates over ethical and financial prudence.
Key Takeaways
- The Trump administration’s NIH withdrew funding for research on hormone-treated “transgender animals.”
- The study aimed to assess overdose risks associated with hormone therapy in animals.
- The White Coat Waste Project criticized the project as a misuse of taxpayer dollars.
- Project activities included castrating male rats and using female rats in experiments.
- Critics, like Rep. Nancy Mace, labeled the research wasteful and pseudoscientific.
Overview of the Funding Cuts
The Trump administration’s decision to cut over $1 million in funding for the hormone treatment study responded to growing concerns over the ethics and financial management of taxpayer dollars. The project, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), used taxpayer money to research overdose risks in rats subjected to sex and cross-sex hormones. The White Coat Waste Project unveiled the project details through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, arguing against the merit and methodology of animal experimentation, notably focusing on procedures involving hormone therapy.
Part of the research involved analyzing the toxicokinetics of Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate (GHB), a substance associated with party drugs. Scientists aimed to assess how hormone therapy influenced overdose likelihood. Public advocates against government waste and animal rights argued this research was not justifiable, inciting federal action. The administration’s decision aligns with efforts to reassess federal expenditure, particularly in projects that potentially misuse public funds.
"The grants were uncovered by the White Coat Waste Project, an organization that is fighting to stop wasting tax money on unnecessary painful animal testing"
📰Bureaucrats Defy Trump’s Cuts: Nearly 40 Transgender Animal Experiments, $400M in Tax Dollars, Still Active
by… pic.twitter.com/ibtxhNYjAp
— White Coat Waste Project (@WhiteCoatWaste) March 15, 2025
White Coat Waste Project’s Role
The White Coat Waste Project, a nonprofit focused on eliminating taxpayer-funded animal testing, played a crucial role in bringing the issue to light. Using information sourced via FOIA, the group highlighted ethical concerns surrounding the study’s methodology. The project’s exposure of government-funded transgender animal experiments drew wide attention and subsequent praise from officials, including Rep. Nancy Mace and Sen. Joni Ernst, who supported the funding withdrawal.
“This is a great victory for taxpayers and animals,” said Anthony Bellotti, president and founder of White Coat Waste Project.
Substantial criticism followed the revelation, fuelled by the graphic nature of the experimental procedures used on the animals. The University of Pacific Stockton received NIH funding for the contentious project, which became a focal point of broader governmental efficiency and ethical research discussions.
The Trump Administration just canceled another $2.5M in grants for transgender animal testing exposed by WCW.
That's nine transgender animal testing grants cut by the Trump just this month!https://t.co/z09wXQx1VQ
— White Coat Waste Project (@WhiteCoatWaste) March 18, 2025
Reaction from Lawmakers and Officials
Lawmakers promptly responded to the uncovering of these experiments, with Rep. Nancy Mace highlighting spending over $1 million on investigations pertaining to female rats and testosterone therapy in context with potential overdose on drugs. Similar comments came from Sen. Joni Ernst, who condemned the spending under the guise of eliminating inefficiencies within the Department of Government Efficiency. Both figures endorsed the administration’s decision to cut funds, emphasizing the need for more transparent and ethical allocation of taxpayer resources.
Officials pointed to the research cuts as part of the Trump administration’s broader initiative to mitigate spending inefficiencies. These moves align with ongoing efforts targeting similarly controversial experiments, aimed at fostering more responsible fiscal policies at an administrative level.
