The National Institutes of Health awarded nearly $70,000 to a professor at the University of Hawaii to conduct in-depth interviews with 15 to 20 people. The study's stated purpose is to "deepen understanding of intersectional health disparities, informing culturally appropriate interventions." The target population is described, in the grant's own language, as "Indigenous 2S/LGBTQ+ PLWH."
That acronym stands for Two-Spirit/LGBTQ+ People Living With HIV. And yes, that's a federal grant under the Trump administration.
The recipient is Chase Bryer, a professor at the University of Hawaii, under NIH project #11231533. The research involves conducting interviews with a small pool of Indigenous participants to explore what the grant application describes as "healthy aging indicators" and "intergenerational healing workshops.”
Ian Kingsbury, research director at Do No Harm, didn't hold back. He said there is "enormous intellectual dissonance in this project." His specific objection: "Treating spirituality or 'indigenous ways of knowing' as a lens for disease treatment is unscientific." That's a polite way of saying the NIH is funding a study that substitutes academic jargon for the scientific method.
The grant application itself contains a revealing error. At one point, it uses the word "illicit" when it means "elicit" — as in, the researchers plan to "illicit" responses from participants. When your $70,000 federal grant can't clear basic spell-check, the rigor of the underlying research is an open question.
The broader context is what makes this sting. The Trump administration has made cutting woke federal spending a headline priority. DOGE has been auditing agencies. Entire DEI offices have been shuttered. And yet the NIH's grant pipeline apparently runs on autopilot — the bureaucratic machinery keeps stamping approvals on studies built around intersectional frameworks that the administration has publicly repudiated.
There's a pending lawsuit, GLMA v. NIH, that sits in the background of this story. The legal pressure from activist groups means the agency is fighting on two fronts: an administration that wants to cut this spending and an outside coalition that wants to expand it. The grant to Bryer suggests which side is winning the day-to-day battle inside the building.
Fifteen to twenty interviews. Nearly $70,000. A study framed around "indigenous ways of knowing" as a medical intervention. The administration that promised to drain the swamp is still signing the checks.
