What happens when government scientists decide they can no longer stay silent?

In this episode of We Want Them Infected, Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent welcome Dr. Jenna Norton and Dr. Sylvia Chou—two former NIH scientists who helped organize and sign the Bethesda Declaration, an open letter raising concerns about political interference in biomedical research at the National Institutes of Health.

The conversation explores why hundreds of NIH employees came together to publicly challenge policies they say undermined scientific integrity, disrupted clinical research, and created a culture of fear within one of the world's leading research institutions.

Dr. Norton and Dr. Chou discuss the events leading to the Declaration, the difficult personal decisions they faced, and what they believe has changed one year later. They also examine the broader implications for public trust, scientific independence, and the future of federally funded medical research.

Whether you agree or disagree with their conclusions, this episode offers an inside perspective from scientists who experienced these events firsthand.

• The origins of the Bethesda Declaration
• Why NIH scientists chose to publicly dissent
• Allegations of political influence over scientific research
• Grant terminations and their impact on ongoing clinical trials
• How censorship concerns affected researchers inside NIH
• The culture of fear described by current and former NIH employees
• The challenges facing early-career scientists
• Scientific integrity versus political priorities
• Why the authors say courage and transparency matter in public health
• Reflections one year after the Bethesda Declaration

• Scientific institutions depend on open debate and independent inquiry.
• Research funding decisions can have lasting consequences for patients and public health.
• Whistleblowing often comes with significant personal and professional risk.
• Public trust in science requires transparency and accountability.
• The future of biomedical research depends on protecting scientific integrity.

Subscribe to We Want Them Infected for thoughtful conversations examining the policies, decisions, and scientific debates that continue to shape public health.

Is the "Make America Healthy Again" movement beginning to unravel?

Jonathan Howard, MD, and Wendy Orent examine a wave of recent public health stories that they argue reveal growing dysfunction within the Department of Health and Human Services under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. From staffing shortages and agency leadership vacancies to vaccine policy changes and expanding infectious disease outbreaks, they discuss what they believe are the real-world consequences of current federal health leadership.

The conversation also explores new measles outbreaks, cyclospora foodborne illness, influenza vaccine effectiveness, updated COVID vaccine research, child labor debates, NIH funding, scientific independence, and the continuing influence of prominent pandemic-era commentators.

Whether you agree or disagree, this episode tackles some of the most consequential public health debates unfolding today.

• The latest reporting on RFK Jr.'s leadership at HHS
• Why MAHA and MAGA may be increasingly at odds
• The growing measles outbreaks across the United States
• Cyclospora infections and concerns over weakened food safety oversight
• New research on influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing pediatric deaths
• Updated COVID vaccine effectiveness data against hospitalization and severe illness
• The role of herd immunity and population immunity in today's COVID landscape
• The future of CDC leadership and federal public health agencies
• NIH funding, political oversight, and concerns about scientific independence
• Scott Atlas and calls to abolish the NIH
• Continued debate over COVID lockdowns and pandemic policy
• David Zweig, Jeffrey Tucker, Brownstone Institute, and education debates
• Child labor laws and their intersection with pandemic-era rhetoric
• Why physician-scientists continue debating the legacy of COVID policy
• Scientific misinformation and public trust
• Current public health threats beyond COVID

• RFK Jr.
• Department of Health and Human Services
• MAHA
• MAGA
• Measles resurgence
• Cyclospora outbreak
• Vaccine effectiveness
• Influenza vaccination
• COVID-19 boosters
• CDC leadership
• NIH funding
• Scientific research
• Public health policy
• Pandemic response
• School closures
• Medical misinformation
• Health policy

"Public health leadership isn't judged by rhetoric—it's judged by outcomes."

"Preventable diseases don't care about political ideology."

"Science requires evidence, not personalities."

• Recent New York Times reporting on HHS leadership
• JAMA studies on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness
• CIDRAP influenza vaccine research
• Scientific American reporting on NIH funding changes
• Washington Post reporting on federal science policy

We Want Them Infected examines public health, infectious disease, vaccine policy, misinformation, and science through evidence-based discussion featuring neurologist Dr. Jonathan Howard and science journalist Wendy Orent.

Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and leave a review to help more listeners discover the show.

In Episode 102 of We Want Them Infected, hosts Jonathan Howard and Wendy Orent are joined by Jenna Norton, a public health scientist and NIH program officer who became one of the leading voices opposing what she describes as the politicization of biomedical research.

The conversation begins with a discussion of a recent article by John Ioannidis criticizing "misinformation labeling," prompting a broader conversation about scientific accountability, public trust, and the responsibility to challenge misinformation.

Dr. Norton then shares an insider's perspective on the dramatic changes inside the National Institutes of Health following the arrival of new leadership. She explains how grant cancellations, staffing reductions, halted clinical trials, and increasing political oversight led her and dozens of colleagues to organize the Bethesda Declaration, an open letter expressing concern over threats to scientific independence.

The discussion explores:

• How NIH grant funding works and the role of program officers.
• The culture of scientific collaboration that historically defined the NIH.
• Concerns over political influence in research funding.
• The impact of canceled clinical trials on patients and researchers.
• Why Dr. Norton believes scientific dissent must be protected.
• Her experience being placed on administrative leave after publicly criticizing agency leadership.
• The long-term consequences of politicizing public health research.

The episode concludes with a discussion about proposed federal funding changes, the future of biomedical research, and why protecting scientific integrity matters for every American—not just scientists.

Jenna Norton is a health equity and public health scientist serving as a program officer at the National Institutes of Health, where her work has focused on kidney disease, urology, and health disparities within the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. She is one of the principal organizers and signers of the Bethesda Declaration, a public statement from NIH employees expressing concerns about political interference in biomedical research and the erosion of scientific independence. Dr. Norton has written publicly about scientific integrity, whistleblower protections, and evidence-based policymaking, emphasizing that she speaks in her personal capacity rather than on behalf of the NIH.

• Scientific integrity at the NIH
• The Bethesda Declaration
• NIH grant funding and peer review
• Clinical trial terminations
• Whistleblower protections
• Public trust in science
• Political influence on biomedical research
• Research ethics
• Health disparities
• Evidence-based policymaking