Defend public health includes over 3,000 public health professionals, scientists, clinicians, legal experts, students and advocates. According to Gonsalves, the group seeks to respond to growing political interference in public health infrastructure, including proposed cuts to Medicaid, changes to scientific leadership and shifts in federal research priorities. While the coalition is based at Yale, it includes members from across the country and is focused on broad issues ranging from vaccine policy, reproductive healthcare, biomedical research funding to health equity. 

“We’re all doing this on our own time, and the passion and commitment of so many people in the moment gives me hope,” Gonsalves wrote to the News.

Defend Public Health publishes and promotes op-eds and hosts tele-conferences with union leaders and representatives in order to raise awareness about the threats facing public health, among other initiatives. Additionally, they wrote an open letter opposing Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination for Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Gonsalves hopes to work and collaborate with diverse groups, and encourages  students to get involved. This past Sunday, Defend Public Health’s student caucus held their first meeting, involving undergraduate and graduate students from around the country.

“I cannot think of a time in American history when the voice, skill and ingenuity of students was more needed,” Gonsalves said.

Caitlin Ryus, professor of Emergency Medicine at the School of Medicine, became involved with Defend Public Health in November. 

Ryus felt that her background with science research and clinical work would allow her to participate in the organization’s advocacy efforts. 

“We’re seeing public health infrastructure, which was built over decades, being threatened, whether that’s through funding cuts, politicized leadership changes or anti-science rhetoric,” Ryus said.

She believes it is important for experts to communicate clearly with the population about public health.

Clear communication, Ryus told the News, prevents trust from further being eroded and public health information from being misinterpreted.

“I think that’s one of the great things about Defend Public Health,” Ryus said. “They are trying to bring science out of the ivory tower, through op-eds, social media usage, and grassroots partnerships.”

Ryus also believes protecting public health is particularly important right now. During the COVID-19 pandemic, society relied on “well-funded and nimble scientific infrastructure.” Even now, these qualities are important in fighting seasonal viruses and facilitating research on vaccines and infectious disease treatment.

Ryus has been personally impacted by political attacks on science infrastructure. As a researcher, she relied on grants from the NIH, but had her funding cut. 

“One of the grants supporting my work, which was looking at mental health impacts of different types of homeless shelters, was just terminated less than a week ago,” Ryus said. “We were told it no longer aligned with NIH priorities. That sends a troubling message that research is being deprioritized for vulnerable communities.”

Defend Public Health has taken public stances against figures within the Trump administration.

Mindy Jane Roseman, director of International Law Programs and director of the Gruber Program for Global Justice and Women’s Rights at the Yale Law School, signed the open letter from Defend Public Health opposing Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

Roseman’s work focuses on how international human rights norms and laws improve health outcomes, particularly regarding sexual and reproductive health. While funding for her work does not depend on US government support directly, she is still concerned that the Trump administration wants to remove the voices of underrepresented patients from public health policy, including women and non-gender-conforming patients.

“One size does not fit all,” Roseman said. “It’s important to have diverse representation when doing any kind of health research, because each person’s lived experience really matters.”

By signing the open letter, Roseman hoped to demonstrate she is part of a community who is worried about public health policy. The letter was a “basic exercise of first-amendment rights,” she said, and participating in it is a “fundamental act of democracy.”

Roseman said she hoped the students and younger generations would be energized to stand up for what they believe in and to prevent the federal government from taking further destructive measures.

“Is voicing your dissent going to change policy?” Roseman asked. “We’ll see. But there have already been rollbacks and modifications to some Trump administration policies, and it is all because people have spoken up.”

As of April 14, 2025, Defend Public Health has 7.7k followers on Blue Sky.

The post Yale-launched national coalition aims to defend public health from political threats appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The Humanitarian Research Lab, or HRL, based at the School of Public Health, investigates the alleged mass deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia using open-source intelligence and satellite imagery. Launched in 2022 with $6 million in federal funding, the lab is part of a broader international effort to document potential war crimes and ensure the preservation of critical evidence.

On Feb. 27, the U.S. Department of State paused funding, halting the lab’s work. The State Department has since granted the lab a six-week extension to finalize its evidence preservation efforts, according to the University spokesperson. HRL’s data repository is expected to be transferred to Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement agency, in the coming weeks.

The current six-week extension will allow the lab to complete ongoing analysis and prepare its dataset for transfer to Europol. The long-term future of federal support for the lab remains unclear.

The February pause in funding was not accompanied by a public explanation from the State Department. A spokesperson from Yale confirmed the suspension in early March.

The lab had previously uncovered Russia’s systematic deportation and coerced adoption of Ukrainian children, which HRL researchers described as one of the largest missing persons cases since World War II. In a December 2024 report, the team documented at least 314 children, primarily from the Eastern Donbas region, who were forcibly moved into Russia’s adoption system.

The lab had previously partnered with the U.S. government to document the forced transfer of Ukrainian children following Russia’s 2022 invasion. 

Myron Melnyk, a Yale alumnus and translator involved with HRL, expressed concern over the funding uncertainty, stating that the lab’s documentation efforts could play a role in future international negotiations.

The State Department has not publicly commented on the funding pause or the reinstatement.

The post Yale Humanitarian Research Lab resumes work after federal funding halt appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The School of Medicine immunologist has been working on antiviral drug discovery for emerging pathogens through a National Institutes of Health grant. Although his project was not directly focused on COVID-19, it was swept up in a broader termination of pandemic-related grants. 

Wilen was one of the researchers affected by a recent wave of COVID-19 federal funding cuts. Now, with experiments suspended and hiring frozen, Wilen is left with questions — not only about his own lab’s future, but also about the reliability of federal scientific funding itself.

“It’s not just the loss of money,” Wilen told the News. “It’s the uncertainty. If these grants can be canceled overnight without a clear rationale, how are we supposed to plan or invest in pandemic preparedness?”

In internal documents obtained by Nature, the NIH cited the end of the public health emergency as justification for rescinding pandemic-era research grants, stating that they were “no longer necessary.”

However, faculty at Yale say the move is premature — and potentially harmful to national health preparedness.

“COVID is not over,” said Dr. Sandy Chang ’88, former dean of STEM education and professor of laboratory medicine. “There’s still a significant number of people dying. These cuts are just going to cost additional lives.”

While much of the public has returned to pre-pandemic routines, Yale researchers emphasize that the need for continued research remains urgent. Several labs at the university continue to investigate long COVID, vaccine efficacy and transmission prevention — research heavily reliant on sustained NIH support.

Though his own research is not COVID-related, Chang said the broader funding slowdown has already disrupted the review timeline for grants like his. Chang submitted a grant proposal in January, which he said has still not been assigned a study section.

“Lots of us are in limbo,” Chang said. “We could write 100 grants, but if you’re not going to review them, it’s pointless.”

The effects, according to Chang, reach far beyond delays. He said colleagues in the Department of Laboratory Medicine and the Department of Immunobiology, whose work focuses on COVID-19 and other viruses, are now at risk of losing funding entirely. 

He added that the funding rollback doesn’t just target COVID-specific work — it also jeopardizes research into other pandemic threats, like that conducted by Wilen.

“There are short-sighted, undisciplined cuts, which are not going to lead to any benefit for the American people,” Chang said.

Wilen’s experience reflects that broader concern. His lab was part of a large NIH-funded antiviral development initiative known as AViDD, which supported nine national centers to study pandemic threats. 

Despite the project focusing on a wide range of pathogens, Wilen said all participating teams received abrupt termination notices, citing the end of the COVID emergency. 

“Our research focused on other viruses with pandemic potential,” Wilen said. “Canceling these grants under the logic that ‘COVID is over’ makes no sense at all.”

The decision not only halted Wilen’s planned work but disrupted lab infrastructure, staff support and long-term planning.

Jason Abaluck, professor at the Yale School of Management, echoed concerns about a loss of trust in federal funding. He described the policy shift as “incoherent” and damaging to research stability, and emphasized that even modest investments in vaccine development or public health research can yield high returns.

“We should be gladly paying that money, given the social value of the innovations that come out of the NIH,” Abaluck said. “Even if everything else NIH-funded were a total waste — and it’s not — the return from drug development alone more than justifies the investment.”

According to Abaluck, cutting funding based on the assumption that the pandemic is over risks stalling life-saving innovations. 

Jordan Peccia, professor of chemical and environmental engineering, underscored the importance of research on airborne transmission.

“No one figured out how to stop the environmental spread of COVID-19,” Peccia wrote. “We are very far from controlling infectious disease … Let’s not go through that again.”

Beyond immediate disruptions, Yale researchers also worry about long-term impacts on the scientific workforce. 

Wilen said postdocs and early-career researchers are beginning to look outside the United States for more stable opportunities. Others are considering leaving academia entirely.

“We’re going to lose some of the best people,” he said. “And there are experiments — important ones — that simply won’t be done now.”

Dr. Howard Forman, professor of public health and management, noted that the cuts could also influence the direction of U.S. scientific innovation, as they signal to researchers that “certain areas are going to be less productive for their time.” 

While Yale and other universities have begun offering temporary bridge funding to offset the losses, faculty say it is not a long-term solution. Wilen added that the inconsistency in federal policy makes it difficult to predict which programs may be at risk next.

“This isn’t about a single grant,” he said. “It’s about whether the government is going to stand behind the research it says it values.”

The post Yale pandemic research loses federal funding appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The cuts, announced by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on March 27, terminated grants that supported programs across the Connecticut Department of Public Health — or DPH — the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services — or DMHAS — and the Office of Early Childhood. The rescinded funding had enabled initiatives such as newborn screenings, infectious disease surveillance, immunization campaigns and community-based addiction treatment. Several of such programs had longstanding ties to Yale through research collaborations, public health partnerships and training pipelines for medical and public health students, concerning researchers and professors across the university.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong joined attorneys general from states including California, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and Pennsylvania in the lawsuit, which seeks an immediate injunction to prevent further terminations and reinstate the grants. The complaint alleges that the administration’s actions violate the Administrative Procedure Act, which prohibits federal agencies from making abrupt policy changes without public notice or justification.

Connecticut’s legal response has drawn support from Yale faculty who see the lawsuit as a critical step toward preserving public health infrastructure. Dr. Reshma Ramachandran, assistant professor at the School of Medicine, said she supports the legal challenge and sees it as essential to protecting Connecticut’s health infrastructure.

“It’s a good sign that the state is taking this seriously and pushing back,” she told the News. “But I worry that without immediate relief, the damage to public health capacity and research will already be done.”

State officials have said the funding terminations will force the cancellation of dozens of contracts, including 48 local immunization partnerships and regional behavioral health services, according to the press release from Gov. Ned Lamont. 

The grants, authorized by Congress during the COVID-19 pandemic, were designed to bolster long-term infrastructure for disease monitoring, rural outreach and public health modernization, according to Lamont’s press release. Now, health providers and local agencies are bracing for service disruptions as programs wind down.

“These abrupt and unexpected cuts to our health system are going to have a devastating impact on our ability to fight disease, protect the health of newborns, provide mental health and addiction treatment services and keep people safe,” Gov. Lamont said in a March 27 press release.

In the press release, Lamont emphasized that the rescinded funds were not short-term emergency relief, but multi-year investments intended to sustain long-term public health readiness. 

Commissioner of Public Health Manisha Juthani said the grants helped build “core public health functions,” and warned that the loss of funding would severely limit the state’s ability to detect and respond to emerging threats.

The state’s preliminary review shows that several programs are already paused or shuttered, including mobile vaccine clinics, newborn screening enhancements and genomic surveillance equipment installation. The Office of Early Childhood’s Family Bridge Program, which sends nurses to visit families of newborns, is also slated for defunding.

Dr. Sandy Chang ’88, former dean of STEM education and professor of Laboratory Medicine, said the effects of the funding cuts are likely to ripple through both the public and academic health systems.

“All the public health initiatives that Connecticut has been doing — immunization, early cancer detection — are going to go away,” he told the News. “It’s going to impact the most needy people, the people who need critical care and are supported by these initiatives.”

Chang added that beyond community-level consequences, the rollback of funding may hinder clinical research collaborations and preventative medicine programs at Yale and other academic institutions. Many of these programs depend on state and federal support to operate, especially those serving vulnerable populations in New Haven and other underserved regions.

Public health experts have also raised concerns about Connecticut’s future preparedness for pandemics or other health emergencies. According to the state’s impact assessment, the termination of electronic disease reporting and syndromic surveillance tools will limit the state’s ability to track outbreaks in real time or coordinate with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Chang said the sudden removal of infrastructure funding puts the state in a weaker position to respond to future disease outbreaks. 

“Preventative medicine, future pandemic response—all of that’s going to be curtailed,” he said. “If there’s another COVID — or something like it — we’re crippled. Not just us, but the CDC and global monitoring efforts as well.”

Yale faculty have also highlighted the consequences of these changes for research and workforce development. Ramachandran noted that some public health staff funded by these grants have already been laid off, including those working on newborn screening programs. She said the effects of the cuts will extend beyond service access.

“This funding is critical not just for delivering public health interventions, but for evaluating whether they actually work,” Ramachandran said. “We’re going to see a huge narrowing of the pipeline of people coming into academic medicine and research.”

Ramachandran added that the loss of surveillance capacity may further strain healthcare systems already dealing with increased respiratory illness. She cited the recent severe flu season in Connecticut, which left hospital emergency departments over capacity, as an example of the risks posed by limited state-level coordination and real-time tracking tools.

Economists are also critical of the cuts. Jason Abaluck, a professor at the School of Management, said that federal public health and NIH funding consistently show high social return on investment, especially in biomedical innovation and pharmaceutical development. He noted that reductions in funding are likely to reduce research productivity and innovation across the country.

“You get a lot less research, and that research is on the margin clearly worth that spending,” Abaluck told the News. “Even if only a small portion of NIH grants lead to new drug development, the health and economic value generated is significant.”

Abaluck explained that while the $150 million in lost funding represents a small fraction of Connecticut’s economy, the targeted removal of low-cost, high-impact prevention programs could lead to higher downstream costs — both in healthcare spending and public health outcomes.

The multistate lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, expands on these concerns. The plaintiffs argue that the Department of Health and Human Services provided no rationale for terminating the grants, failed to consult with stakeholders and ignored the severe consequences to state and local health systems.

“The Department’s abrupt decision to terminate funding for vital public health infrastructure programs threatens the health and safety of millions of people,” the complaint reads. “These funds were lawfully appropriated by Congress and relied upon by states and territories across the nation.”

As litigation over the funding cuts proceeds, state officials say they will continue to evaluate which programs may be preserved or restored through alternate means. Faculty members like Ramachandran believe the lawsuit is a necessary step, but warn that even a successful legal challenge may come too late to reverse the short-term damage. 

“Programs have already stopped, and people have already lost their jobs,” she said. “The long-term effects may last far beyond this funding cycle.”

The post Connecticut sues Trump administration over $150M in public health cuts appeared first on Yale Daily News.

On March 18, YNHH announced it had begun using the Symani Surgical System, a robotic platform designed to enhance precision during microsurgery and supermicrosurgery — procedures that involve connecting tiny blood vessels and lymphatic channels. YNHH is currently one of only five hospitals in the United States using the technology. Hospital leaders say the system may improve outcomes and reduce recovery time for patients undergoing breast reconstruction, lymphatic repair and trauma-related surgery.

The Symani system works by translating a surgeon’s hand movements into smaller, more controlled motions, reducing the margin of error in procedures where accuracy is essential. The robot’s design allows it to handle sutures and vessels that are less than one millimeter wide, which are difficult to work with using the human hand alone. While its current use is in breast and lymphatic surgery, the technology may eventually be applied to areas such as head and neck cancer reconstruction, ear surgery and organ transplants.

“It allows the surgeon to make a large movement, which translates by the robot into a microscopic movement,” said Dr. Bohdan Pomahac, chief of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at YNHH. “Any precision manipulations are going to be greatly helped with the aid of the robot.”

This can have real benefits for patient recovery. 

For example, in breast reconstruction using a patient’s own abdominal tissue, the robot allows surgeons to connect smaller vessels closer to the skin’s surface. That means they no longer need to make larger incisions through muscle and fascia — the layers of tissue covering the muscles — reducing pain and healing time. According to Pomahac, patients who previously needed several inches of dissection may now require only two or three.

“This will greatly enhance care for patients affected by trauma, cancer, congenital malformations and lymphedema,” said Dr. Nita Ahuja, chief of Surgery at YNHH and chair of Surgery at the Yale School of Medicine.

The Symani robot may also accelerate surgical training. Pomahac said that studies have shown novice users to perform surgical tasks with the robot at expert levels after only five to seven practice sessions. In contrast, traditional microsurgery techniques often require years of training and experience to master.

Training on the Symani system includes two days of instruction in a simulated environment, followed by supervised clinical use. At YNHH, only surgeons with prior microsurgical experience are currently approved to operate the robot. The system itself is mobile and can be brought into the operating room without major changes to equipment or setup.

The hospital is also the lead site for a nationwide clinical trial evaluating outcomes of surgeries performed using the robot. The trial, which includes four other hospitals and may expand to eight to 12 sites, will gather data on breast reconstruction, lymphatic procedures and head and neck reconstruction.

“We are very excited to join the very small group of hospitals in the U.S. and across the world using this robot to treat the most challenging patient conditions,” said Dr. Katherine Heilpern, president of YNHH.

The Symani system was developed by Medical Microinstruments, or MMI, a company focused on improving outcomes in soft tissue surgery. 

Pomahac said his relationship with the company, which began during his time at Harvard Medical School, played a role in bringing the robot to Yale. He currently serves as the lead investigator for the clinical trials assessing the system’s performance.

He added that YNHH’s leadership was receptive to adopting the technology and supported the acquisition. According to Pomahac, the company is now working on new tools to expand the system’s capabilities, including energy instruments and fine dissection tools, which could enable broader use in transplant, brain and gynecologic surgery.

Pomahac said the broader field of robotic surgery continues to grow. In other specialties, robots are already used to guide orthopedic implants or assist with abdominal surgery. The Symani system, however, is one of the first designed specifically for soft tissue microsurgery. Unlike most surgical robots, it does not require a physical connection between the surgeon and the robotic arm, and operates through a video console, making setup quicker and easier.

“Robots are the future,” Pomahac said. “I think technology will reduce surgeon error and help standardize operations in a way that improves consistency and outcomes.”

YNHH is located at 20 York St.

The post YNHH becomes first in New England to use robotic system for microsurgery appeared first on Yale Daily News.

At a March virtual town hall, Yale New Haven Health System — YNHHS — administrators presented three key initiatives: the Access 365 program to streamline patient access, a redesigned operating model aimed at improving organizational alignment and a plan to expand clinical services into new geographic regions. 

Addressing faculty and staff, administrators cited external pressures and systemwide goals as reasons for the updates.

“We want to move from being good to being excellent,” YNHHS CEO Christopher O’Connor said at the event. “And part of that is going to be reacting and being ready to support changes that may be necessary.”

Access 365 progress

Peggy McGovern, CEO of Yale Medicine and chief physician executive for YNHHS, led the presentation on the system’s Access 365 initiative, aimed at streamlining scheduling, triage and financial transparency for patients. The initiative is structured around five pillars: capacity management, scheduling systems, referral processes, clinical coordination and financial health.

The Access 365 initiative is being implemented in phases across different specialties or departments. By gradually introducing reforms, Yale New Haven Health aims to test, refine and scale the system without overwhelming staff or disrupting patient care.

The Access 365 initiative has optimized scheduling to increase appointment availability, showing early signs of progress in reducing appointment lag, according to McGovern. For specialties included in the program’s first two phases, the median wait time for a new patient fell from 23 days to 16. 

However, the wait time remains above the industry benchmark of 14 days. In primary care, wait times have only improved slightly, from 30 to 29 days.

McGovern emphasized that while scheduling is often viewed as the primary access issue, underlying gaps in clinician availability are also central. For some services, particularly in primary care, staff shortages remain a limiting factor.

To improve communication and patient flow, YNHHS is transitioning from its previous Cisco-based call platform to a new system called Genesis, which offers artificial intelligence routing and built-in analytics.

McGovern noted that a February cyberattack, which rendered Cisco inoperable, accelerated the rollout of Genesis. The transition allowed 88 percent of call center volume to return to full functionality within weeks.

The initiative also introduced self-scheduling tools, but adoption remains low, with only 1.4 percent of patients using the feature. Patient experience scores related to scheduling have improved modestly. 

McGovern stressed that continued investments in scheduling technology, care triage staffing and template standardization are underway, with additional clinical areas slated for implementation through eight phases stretching into the coming year.

Operating model shifts 

Pamela Sutton-Wallace, the chief operating officer of Yale New Haven Health, introduced the health system’s new operating model — a structural redesign that aims to better align inpatient, ambulatory and at-home care under centralized leadership, she said.

The model divides care delivery into three main categories: inpatient operations, which refers to hospital-based care; ambulatory practices, which covers outpatient clinic visits; and health at home, which focuses on care delivered at home or through remote monitoring. 

Each of these care settings is supported by shared resources, including physician leadership, core medical services such as imaging and laboratory testing and centralized administrative teams for functions like human resources, digital technology and finance.

“What we know is that more and more care is being moved into the ambulatory setting,” Sutton-Wallace said. “And it’s better for our patients.”

The reorganization reflects a shift toward care delivery outside of traditional hospital settings. 

Ambulatory practices — including Yale Medicine, Northeast Medical Group and hospital-based outpatient clinics — will now report through a unified leadership team led by Jorge Rodriguez, chief ambulatory officer, and Dr. Patrick Kenney, chief ambulatory physician executive. The goal, Sutton-Wallace stated, is to bring consistency in clinical standards, safety protocols and patient experience across all outpatient settings.

Inpatient operations, previously embedded in service line structures, will now report to Courtney Bose, YNHHS chief nursing officer. 

Health at Home encompasses home health visits, remote monitoring and companion care, positioning YNHHS to respond to patient preferences for care closer to or within the home.

Platform services, including pathology, anesthesia and perioperative care, will serve all three verticals. Corporate services such as IT and HR will be further centralized, part of a broader effort to reduce redundancy and achieve economies of scale. Sutton-Wallace described the new model as consistent with national best practices at other large academic health systems.

The reorganization also includes changes to the roles of advanced practice providers, or APPs. Under the new structure, outpatient APPs will be more directly embedded into scheduling systems and clinical workflows, allowing them to practice at the top of their licenses and improve appointment availability.

“We are doing this work to get everyone working top of license,” McGovern said. 

Leadership acknowledged that the redesign will affect some staff roles but emphasized that most changes were managed through attrition and vacant positions. New roles have been created to support the redesigned model, they said.

Growth plans

In the final section of the town hall, CEO Christopher O’Connor and Yale School of Medicine Dean Nancy Brown outlined the system’s growth plans, focusing on geographic expansion and infrastructure development.

The goal, according to O’Connor, is to bring high-quality services closer to patients’ homes and expand Yale New Haven Health’s footprint in areas where demand is strong and access is limited. 

In Central Connecticut, the system plans to renovate a building it already owns to serve as a major outpatient hub. In Mid-Fairfield County, real estate searches are underway to establish a clinical presence between Bridgeport and Greenwich. In Westchester County, YNHHS is initiating services at two locations, with a particular focus on obstetrics, in response to rising demand and disruptions in local care availability.

“Over 50 percent of the inpatient admissions into Greenwich come from Westchester,” O’Connor said. “Establishing services there is critical to our future.”

Brown described the expansion as vital to executing the joint clinical strategic plan developed by the medical school and the health system.

Both Brown and O’Connor also addressed looming policy and financial uncertainties, including potential cuts to Medicaid and Medicare funding, as well as changes to site-neutral payment policies. Connecticut currently faces a $1.4 billion annual Medicaid funding gap, with YNHHS shouldering more than $450 million of that shortfall. Federal budget proposals signal further reductions.

“We didn’t build this reimbursement system,” O’Connor said. “We just try to manage within it.”

Despite these challenges, leaders reaffirmed their commitment to growth and emphasized that efficiency, coordination and patient-centered design will be at the core of future planning.

The Yale School of Medicine was founded in 1810.

The post Yale New Haven Health unveils updates to Access 365, operating model and growth plans appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The funding data, compiled annually by the Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research, show that the Departments of Comparative Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Psychiatry each received more NIH funding than any other departments in their respective fields.

The School of Medicine received over $598 million in NIH funding last fiscal year, a nearly 5 percent increase from 2023. The School of Public Health, included in Yale’s total for the final time before becoming an independent institution, ranked third among public health schools.

“The continued rise in the ranking in NIH funding reflects the excellence and commitment of faculty in Yale School of Medicine and Yale School of Public Health,” medical school Dean Nancy Brown wrote in an email to the News. “It also reflects a return on investments in the priorities of the University Science Strategic Plan, including in neuroscience, inflammation, cancer, and data science.”

One of the departments receiving the most NIH funding among peers, Comparative Medicine, integrates research on a range of species and model systems, linking basic science discoveries with human-focused investigations.

Chair Tamas Horvath described this breadth as essential to the department’s approach and funding success.

“I believe that [the ranking] is due to our faculty’s in-depth, albeit broad interest in biomedicine using multiple model systems as well as human subjects,” Horvath wrote in an email to the News. “Thus, we provide a platform from basic sciences to direct interrogation of the human condition.”

Faculty in the department approach the mammalian body as a coordinated system, with research spanning metabolic, neurological and behavioral health. The department’s work often examines how functions at the cellular and tissue levels influence higher-order processes, such as cognition and behavior.

This systems-based orientation distinguishes Yale’s program from others nationally, Horvath wrote. Rather than organizing around a single disease or organ, the department studies interrelated biological mechanisms across species.

Collaboration with researchers across departments, institutions and disciplines has also been key to the department’s grant success. Horvath emphasized that such partnerships are not only beneficial but necessary for meaningful translational science.

Another department that led the nation in its field is Emergency Medicine. The department’s top ranking reflects a broad portfolio of research initiatives focused on both acute care and longer-term public health needs.

Faculty in the department conduct research on a range of topics, including opioid and alcohol use disorders, stroke and neurological emergencies and cardiovascular resuscitation.

“We have a very talented group of investigators studying important topics related to the fields of emergency medicine and addiction,” Gail D’Onofrio, a professor of emergency medicine, wrote to the News. 

D’Onofrio emphasized that the department’s operations are supported by research staff, administrators and pharmacists who manage clinical trials and assist with electronic health record integration.

She noted the department’s involvement in national networks focused on addiction and acute care trials.

“It takes a village — literally — to especially do clinical trials in the emergency department setting,” she wrote.

Yale’s Department of Psychiatry also ranked first in the nation, with more than $113 million in NIH funding. According to department chair Dr. John Krystal, the total includes awards to the department as well as the Yale Child Study Center.

Krystal attributed the ranking to the combined efforts of researchers, clinicians, trainees, staff and study participants. “No single person achieved this ranking,” Krystal wrote in an email to the News. 

Krystal pointed to the department’s recent contributions to research on schizophrenia, psychiatric biomarkers, tobacco use and psychedelic science as evidence of the quality of its work.

Faculty leaders noted that while rankings reflect funding totals, long-term research impact will depend on continued collaboration, infrastructure support and researcher retention. Dean Brown wrote that maintaining Yale’s position requires sustained investment, particularly during a time of uncertainty in federal science policy.

“We have recruited some amazing scientists and supported those who were already here,” Brown wrote. “It is important that we continue to do that during a time of uncertainty.”

As national conversations around NIH policy and federal research spending continue, department leaders expressed a range of perspectives on how political shifts may affect funding stability and long-term research planning.

Horvath wrote that despite current uncertainties, his department intends to maintain its focus on foundational, curiosity-driven science.

He added that research grounded in relevance to human health remains essential, regardless of external pressures. 

“If the projects we design and execute have relevance to the human condition, we will prevail regardless of day-to-day politics at state, national or international level,” he wrote.

D’Onofrio similarly acknowledged the potential risks of changes in federal funding priorities but emphasized the broad applicability of her department’s work as a stabilizing force.

“Our trials are investigating multiple diseases, illness and injuries affecting broad populations that could potentially improve the health of the public,” she wrote.

The Yale School of Medicine is located at 333 Cedar St.

Correction, March 30: This article has been updated with Gail D’Onofrio’s correct title.

The post Yale School of Medicine rises to third in NIH funding for 2024 appeared first on Yale Daily News.

The study was published as a preprint, meaning it has not yet undergone peer review, a critical step where independent experts evaluate the study’s methodology, analysis and conclusions to ensure accuracy and rigor before formal publication. Since its release on Feb. 25, the preprint by Akiko Iwasaki and Dr. Harlan Krumholz has drawn both praise and controversy. 

While the study emphasized its preliminary nature and small sample size, it has nonetheless been invoked by vaccine skeptics such as Elon Musk, senior advisor to President Donald Trump, as supposed evidence of vaccine harm. The incident has renewed concerns among researchers at Yale about how to navigate politically sensitive science — particularly in the current climate, where public confidence in vaccines and scientific institutions continues to waver. 

“Now more than ever, I think it is crucial to study the potential adverse events after vaccination with rigorous scientific approaches,” Iwasaki, Sterling Professor of Immunobiology, wrote in an email to the News. “Ultimately, we want to make vaccines safer for everyone in the future.”

The PVS preprint study, which analyzed immune markers in 42 individuals reporting persistent symptoms following COVID-19 vaccination, has faced both scrutiny and misinterpretation. 

Critics have pointed to the study’s small sample size, lack of control group and preprint status, raising concerns that its findings could be overstated or misinterpreted. Some scientists have expressed worry that releasing preliminary research on such a politically charged topic could inadvertently fuel vaccine fear, especially in online spaces where nuance is often lost. 

Supporters of the study, however, view it as a necessary step toward understanding a poorly defined condition and responding to the experiences of individuals reporting long-term post-vaccination symptoms. The controversy intensified when Musk reposted a tweet that included a screenshot of an article published on The Disinformation Chronicle. The tweet, which currently has 2.1 million views, read, “They are finally admitting ‘Long COVID’ is just vaccine injury.”

Iwasaki replied, tweeting “No. This is not what our study shows.”

Dr. Howard Forman, a professor of public health and management at Yale, acknowledged the controversy and the tension it reveals about science communication today.

According to Forman, the study has a narrow scope, and may not have results that are relevant to all mRNA vaccines. However, he pushed back against leaving the study unpublished just because it sparked controversy. 

“But choosing not to publish it because the results might be misused would be a mistake,” Forman said. “We don’t stop science because it’s inconvenient.”

Forman noted that the backlash was predictable in today’s information ecosystem, where scientific findings have been stripped of context and amplified for political ends. 

“People reacted very angrily on both sides,” he said. “And quite frankly, I think that’s to their detriment.”

For many scientists, however, the concern is not simply about how research is shared, but how it is interpreted. 

Mark Schlesinger, a professor of health policy at the School of Public Health, noted that public expectations around vaccines are often shaped by the belief that medical care should be risk-free. 

“There is never any kind of medical treatment that doesn’t do harm. It could be to a relatively small number of people, but some people will still have harms done to them,” Schlesinger said. “When people hear that the vaccine does some harm to some people, like that preprint that came out, because their expectations are almost unduly positive, hearing about any harm makes them feel like someone has either screwed up or lied to them.”

According to Schlesinger, skepticism expanded significantly during the pandemic as mRNA vaccines were introduced under emergency authorization, noting that concerns around the novelty of the technology were reasonable but often uninformed.

Schlesinger explained that before the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine hesitancy in the United States was more commonly found among well-educated, politically liberal individuals, often rooted in skepticism toward the pharmaceutical industry. 

However, the introduction of mRNA vaccines during the pandemic contributed to a rise in vaccine hesitancy among more conservative and less formally educated groups. Concerns about the new technology, combined with political discourse and resistance to perceived government mandates fueled this shift, Schlesinger explained.

“Public sentiment around vaccines has been eroded by deliberate disinformation campaigns”, Dr. Caitlin Ryus, a Yale emergency physician and public health advocate, noted. “Now we’re seeing vaccine skepticism normalized, even in policy decisions.” 

Both Ryus and Schlesinger agree that while skepticism is still concentrated in specific groups, its growing visibility — especially on social media — has fueled anti-vaccine narratives in public discourse.

“I think it’s unfortunate that the last 70 years of dramatic vaccine development is coming into question at this point,” Forman stated. “When you get the same answer all the time and the research gives you the right answer consistently, the notion of going back and questioning that becomes less about skepticism and more about conspiracies.”

Critics of the administration have pointed to both the language and the actions of public health officials — such as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — as indicative of a growing anti-vaccine stance. 

Ryus said she sees signs of an increasing popularization of anti-vaccine rhetoric in both policy and leadership appointments.

“This administration has not only failed to correct misinformation, but in some cases, it’s legitimizing it,” she said. “That has real consequences.”

Forman, Schlesinger and Ryus each pointed to the importance of improving science communication, particularly as misinformation continues to circulate widely. They emphasized the need for communication that is accurate, accessible and sensitive to how scientific findings are interpreted by the public.

“We need to translate science into plain language,” Ryus said. “It needs to connect to people’s values and lived experience. That means leading with stories and not just data.”

Schlesinger pointed out that one major challenge is how to explain that all vaccines — and all treatments — carry some risk. 

“It becomes our obligation to help people deal with negative consequences,” he said, referencing the federal vaccine injury compensation fund. “Because if we’re going to mandate vaccination, we have to own the risks that come with it.”

In the case of the PVS study, Iwasaki said her team worked hard to communicate their findings responsibly, acknowledging limitations and sharing the research only after a careful review process.

“Unfortunately, our findings have been used by some to fuel misinformation,” Iwasaki said. “But all we can do is provide our own coverage of the study in a responsible manner.”

As debates over vaccine research and public trust continue, Yale experts underscored the importance of preserving scientific rigor and integrity — even when the findings are inconvenient or unpopular.

“It’s a delicate balance,” Ryus said. “But the answer isn’t silence. It’s better science, clearer communication, and the courage to speak up.”

The post Amid political shift, Yale experts weigh vaccine skepticism and scientific integrity appeared first on Yale Daily News.

In 2023, Connecticut nursing programs had nearly 3,000 available seats and received thousands of qualified applications. Only 2,181 students graduated, leaving healthcare systems strained and short-staffed. The number of working registered nurses decreased nationally by more than 100,000 from 2020 to 2021.

“We’re making progress, but capacity is still a real barrier,” said Dr. Tina Loarte Rodriguez, executive director of the Connecticut Center for Nursing Workforce, or CCNW.

The CCNW reported a 91 percent fill rate in the state’s pre-licensure registered nurse programs last year. However, institutional constraints — ranging from faculty shortages to limited clinical placement slots — continue to hamper program growth. Yale School of Nursing, or YSN, has sought to address these challenges through strategic updates to its academic programming.

According to Lillian Zepeda, a spokesperson for YSN, the school has adapted its curriculum, launched an advisory board to bolster clinical partnerships and incorporated advanced simulation tools to better prepare students for clinical realities. In 2023, Connecticut obtained $2.9 million in federal funding to train nurses and create opportunities for frontline healthcare professionals, adding momentum to these institutional efforts.

Yale has also introduced initiatives to bridge the gap between admitted students and actual enrollment. For example, a student ambassador program and alumni outreach network aim to ease applicant uncertainty.

Additionally, the school’s Community Scholars Program will fully fund 21 students next year as part of a broader effort to remove financial barriers to nursing education.

Other Connecticut universities, such as Quinnipiac University, are also responding to the demand. 

According to Dean Larry Slater, Quinnipiac’s nursing school is overhauling its curriculum to build durable, transferable skills and reduce reliance on high-stakes testing. The university is also expanding access through a part-time Bachelor of Science in Nursing program in partnership with Hartford Healthcare, designed to support working students and ease workforce onboarding.

Despite these efforts, workforce gaps remain, particularly in critical care, long-term care and community health settings. Statewide data in 2022 shows that while nearly 90,000 registered nurses hold licenses in Connecticut, only 51,000 are actively practicing. The Health Resources and Services Administration even projected national nurse shortages until 2037.

“The core issue isn’t just a shortage of nurses — it’s a shortage of support once they’re in the field,” Rodriguez wrote to the News in an email. “Moral distress, burnout and a lack of mentorship continue to push skilled nurses out of direct patient care.”

Rodriguez added that solutions will require long-term investment. Her organization is working with policymakers and academic leaders to develop scalable models for faculty training, retention support and early exposure to healthcare careers — even starting as early as preschool.

At Yale, the integration of resilience training and burnout prevention into the curriculum is one way the institution hopes to better equip students for the emotional demands of frontline care. Students also complete clinical rotations at Yale New Haven Health and other regional partners.

Yet, for students training to become advanced practice registered nurses, finding clinical placements remains a challenge. Max Greger-Moser, a nurse practitioner who precepts psychiatric nurse practitioner students, said he has seen a sharp increase in requests for rotations.

“Ten years ago, I had one student a year,” Greger-Moser said. “This year, I’ll have at least three — and I still turn many away. It strikes me as a shame that we have motivated students who want to treat patients but can’t access the clinical training they need.”

As Yale and other institutions work to address the workforce shortage through education and pipeline development, experts caution that changes to payment models and licensure policy will also be necessary.

According to Rodriguez, modernizing scope-of-practice laws and reimbursing broader nursing services — particularly in primary and preventive care — could play a key role in sustaining the profession.

The nursing shortfall is expected to persist for years. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects 194,500 annual registered nurse job openings through 2033, while federal estimates suggest a 10 percent national shortage of nurses by 2027. For Yale and its affiliates, the question is not only how to train more nurses — but how to ensure they stay.

The School of Nursing is located at 400 West Campus Drive in Orange, Conn.

The post Connecticut universities adapt nursing curriculum amid statewide nursing shortages appeared first on Yale Daily News.

On March 19, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas approved a revised settlement between Prospect Medical Holdings and Medical Properties Trust. The Court’s decision allowed Prospect to proceed with a court-supervised auction of its hospital assets, including three Connecticut Hospitals — Waterbury Hospital, Manchester Memorial Hospital and Rockville General Hospital. 

The updated settlement allocates a greater share of sale proceeds to creditors such as the city of Waterbury and the state of Connecticut, which are owed more than $100 million combined. While the auction process is now underway, Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation filed a motion reserving its right under a 2022 asset purchase agreement with Prospect, expressing concern that the bankruptcy sale may impact its legal claims. 

“Each one of these steps is a step in the right direction toward finding a better outcome for the hospitals currently under Prospect Medical,” said Howard Forman, a professor of public health and economics.

Yale New Haven Health, which signed a $435 million agreement to acquire the three Connecticut hospitals in 2022, filed suit in 2024 to terminate the deal, citing Prospect’s alleged failure to meet financial, regulatory and operational obligations. Prospect filed a counterclaim, asserting that Yale had breached the agreement. That litigation, which has been transferred to federal court in Connecticut, remains unresolved.

In its reservation of rights filed on March 14, Yale raised concerns that Prospect’s plan to sell the hospitals through bankruptcy could interfere with the unresolved dispute.

“Notwithstanding the bidding procedures motion, Prospect has continued to take the position that the [Asset Purchase Agreement] remains effective and enforceable,” Yale’s attorneys wrote.

In its filing, Yale also alleged that Prospect failed to meet a wide range of financial, operational and legal obligations outlined in the original agreement — failures that, according to Yale, have severely damaged the hospitals’ ability to provide safe and consistent care. These included missed payments to physicians and vendors, neglect for routine maintenance and safety protocols and a ransomware attack that compromised the personal and medical information of more than 100,000 patients and employees, blaming it on Prospect’s lack of investment in adequate cybersecurity systems.  

Beyond operational concerns, Yale pointed to more than $100 million in unpaid provider taxes owed to the state and at least $12 million in overdue property taxes to the city of Waterbury, which have resulted in state and local agencies placing liens on the hospitals.

“Since signing the APA, the CT Businesses’ financial performance has collapsed,” Yale wrote. “It is therefore unclear whether the Debtors seek to impact YNHH’s rights in the Connecticut Action through the Bidding Procedures Motion.”

Yale argued that Prospect is trying to move forward with a bankruptcy sale while still claiming that the original $435 million APA between the two parties remains valid. This, according to Yale, creates legal confusion — particularly because Prospect has continued to send notices suggesting the Asset Purchase Agreement, or APA, is still in effect, despite now seeking to sell the same hospitals to new buyers through a separate court-supervised process. 

Additionally, Yale emphasized that any dispute over the APA should be decided in Connecticut State Court, as originally agreed by both parties. Yale is concerned that the Texas bankruptcy court process could undermine its ongoing lawsuit, where it claims that Prospect breached the agreement and that Yale is no longer obligated to complete the purchase. With a trial date originally scheduled for April, Yale is urging the court not to let the bankruptcy proceedings interfere with what it views as a nearly resolved case. 

While Yale raised alarms about Prospect’s mismanagement of the hospitals and the potential legal implications of their sale, the bankruptcy process is moving ahead. Prospect, now operating under Chapter 11 protections, is pursuing a structured sale process designed to resolve its financial crisis and transfer hospital ownership. 

In its Feb. 18 motion to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Prospect asked the court to approve a timeline and structure for auctioning its Connecticut hospitals. According to the filing, the sale process will unfold over several weeks. In mid-May, Prospect may select what’s known as a “stalking horse” bidder — a term for the first buyer who sets a minimum price in an auction. Other interested buyers would then have until late May to submit their offers. 

The auction itself is expected in early June, followed by a court hearing to approve the final sale. Medical Properties Trust will have a say in who the buyer is, especially if the hospital properties are still involved in the deal. 

In its motion to the court, Prospect described the auction as “a fulsome sale and marketing process … all while minimizing administrative costs associated with the chapter 11 process.”

The company argued that a well-organized, court-supervised auction would help draw in serious buyers, set fair prices and avoid dragging out the bankruptcy process. The goal, according to Prospect, is to make sure the hospitals are sold quickly and efficiently — protecting their value and reducing the risk of further disruption to patient care or hospital operations.

Forman noted that even though Yale walked away from its earlier deal with Prospect, the bankruptcy sale represents a new opportunity.

“The door was closed to acquiring [the hospitals] from Prospect, but acquiring them from bankruptcy is a different situation,” Forman said. “It’s almost like Prospect is out of the picture.” 

The uncertainty surrounding who will ultimately acquire and operate the hospitals has drawn concern from local officials and public health experts. While several healthcare systems are believed to be monitoring the sale process, the outcome could significantly influence healthcare access for New Haven communities. 

Prospect Medical Holdings is headquartered in Culver City, Calif.

The post Yale New Haven Health pushes back on Prospect’s Texas bankruptcy sale plan appeared first on Yale Daily News.