The Guardian view on mRNA vaccines: they are the future – with or without Donald Trump | Editorial

Over the holiday period, the Guardian leader column is looking ahead at the themes of 2026. Today we examine how the White House's war on vaccines has left the future of a key technology uncertain and up for grabs

The late scientist and thinker Donald Braben argued that 20th-century breakthroughs arose from scientists being free to pursue bold ideas without pressure for quick results or rigid peer review. The rapid development of Covid-19 vaccines seemed to validate his claim: emergency conditions sped up trials, relaxed regulatory sequencing and encouragedscientists to share findings before peer review. Out of that sprang one of the great scientific success stories of our age: mRNA vaccines. These use synthetic genetic code to train the immune system to defend itself against viruses. Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman, whose work enabled the mRNACovid vaccine, went on to win the Nobel prize. Theirbreakthrough suggests that loosening traditionalconstraints could accelerate major scientific advances.

The extensive scientific and logistic infrastructure built during that period is now occupied with turning the technology towards other diseases: flu, HIV and even cancer. Until very recently, the US, which put more than $10bn into mRNA development, appeared primed to reap the scientific and commercial rewards. Despite the deregulatory zeal that birthed mRNA, the second Trump administration has rejected it. Instead, it has been remarkably steady in its commitment to the radical anti-science and anti-vaccine agenda of the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr. He has spent the past year undermining and outright sabotaging the US's own success. Over the summer, the US Department of Health and Human Services announced a coordinated wind-down" of federal funding for mRNA research, cancelling an additional $500m in funding for 22 projects.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.