“I’m going to walk my daughter down the aisle on her wedding day.” These were the words spoken by Eric, a 35-year-old man recently diagnosed with colon cancer that had metastasized to his liver. As his oncologist, I felt a wave of empathy wash over me, even though I was uncertain if he would live to see that day. At that time, his diagnosis was deemed incurable. However, a groundbreaking study had just emerged, indicating that aggressive surgery combined with chemotherapy could potentially cure patients like Eric.
During a cancer conference at my hospital, I presented Eric's case. While most colleagues were skeptical, one surgeon agreed to explore this uncharted territory. Together, we crafted a treatment plan that offered Eric a renewed hope for the future. Fast forward twenty years, and Eric is not just surviving; he is thriving. He now has two grown daughters and a son, ready for whatever life brings, including the possibility of walking his daughter down the aisle one day.
Eric’s situation has transitioned from being an exception to a hopeful norm. Recent advancements in medical research have shown that we can now cure approximately 25% of patients with stage IV colon cancer that has spread to the liver. Chemotherapy treatments have seen significant improvements, thanks to ongoing clinical trials, and we have begun to harness the power of the immune system to combat specific types of colon cancer.
These remarkable advancements in cancer treatment were not achieved by chance. They are the result of meticulous research funded primarily by the U.S. government, which contributed approximately 57% of global cancer research funding from 2016 to 2020. This investment has transformed anecdotes like Eric's into common survival stories, providing patients access to innovative treatments that were once beyond reach.
However, recent funding cuts during the Trump administration pose a significant threat to the future of cancer care. These reductions undermine hope for families grappling with devastating diagnoses. The funding slashes amount to staggering figures, with $400 million cut from Columbia University, $790 million from Northwestern, $1 billion from Cornell, and $2.2 billion from Harvard. Each cut not only diminishes the resources available for cancer research but also jeopardizes the development of treatments that could save lives.
The repercussions of withdrawing support for medical research may not be immediately evident. They will manifest quietly over time — through missed diagnoses, delayed treatments, and ultimately, lives cut short. I can provide countless statistics illustrating how federal investments in medical research have allowed family members to live longer, healthier lives. For instance, the cancer death rate has declined by one-third between 1991 and 2020, and childhood leukemia survival rates have soared from approximately 50% in the 1970s to over 90% today.
Additionally, advancements in screening and early detection have led to earlier cancer identification and prevention, resulting in fewer advanced cancer cases and associated deaths. Proven strategies, such as wearing sunscreen to prevent skin cancer and quitting smoking to reduce lung cancer risk, are now part of public health initiatives supported by research.
As a doctor-turned-patient, I can attest to the critical need for ongoing research. My daughter and I both carry a genetic condition known as hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), which affects our connective tissue and impacts every aspect of our lives. Symptoms include painful joint shifts, digestive issues, and an intolerance to heat. A recent study estimates that 1 in 500 people may be living with this condition, far more than previously believed.
Unfortunately, there is currently no genetic marker, diagnostic test, or proven medication for hypermobile EDS. This lack of understanding has compelled me to take matters into my own hands, conducting personal research and experimenting with untested treatments. While I have attempted various therapies, including stem cell injections and high-dose vitamin C, none come without risks or guarantees of success.
As research on EDS began to gain traction, the administration's cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget and staffing have jeopardized not only advancements for rare conditions like EDS but also breakthroughs in treating cancer, heart disease, dementia, and numerous other diseases. Unlike the immediate repercussions of financial market fluctuations, the effects of reducing medical research funding will be felt quietly yet profoundly. Lives will be lost, and once those years are gone, they cannot be reclaimed.
As a parent, I can face uncertainties about my own health, but I cannot accept a future devoid of progress or solutions for my daughter. Every child deserves better than to inherit a world where medical advancements are stifled.
The stakes are high, not just for my family but for every family relying on scientific breakthroughs to protect their loved ones. We must advocate for continued support of medical research, as it is the key to ensuring a healthier future for all. The promise of tomorrow’s care depends on the investments we make today.
Dr. Jennifer Obel, a retired oncologist and former spokesperson for the American Society of Clinical Oncology, is dedicated to advancing her understanding of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome while focusing on her well-being through exercise and self-care. Her experiences highlight the critical need for ongoing research in both common and rare medical conditions.
