Researchers are grappling with significant uncertainty as they assess which federal public data were removed from government websites and electronic publications during actions taken by the Trump administration. These actions have caused considerable disruption, likened to an emergency situation by one academic, as key public information becomes inaccessible.
Towards the end of last week, federal agencies undertook the removal of numerous governmental web pages in an effort to comply with President Donald Trump’s directive to eliminate protections for transgender individuals. This directive required that the term “gender ideology” be expunged from websites, contracts, and emails. Although some of these web pages have resumed operations as of Monday, data analysts are still uncertain about the specific data that were altered or deleted.
Amy O’Hara, a researcher at Georgetown University and president of the Public Data Users Association, highlighted the gravity of the situation by stating that it felt like a fire alarm had been triggered due to the sudden lack of access to critical federal data. She revealed that the disorder induced was particularly aimed at ensuring copies of any previously published federal data were preserved.
The intent of the government’s directive was stated to focus on removing terminology regarding gender and transgender issues. Amy O’Hara, however, expressed concern that other politically sensitive topics, such as climate change or vaccine information, might also be subject to removal. In response, a panel of experts linked to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) called for a meeting to delve into the rationale behind the data access suspension. This commission, mandated by Congress to advise the CDC director, sought clarification from acting director Susan Monarez regarding the impact of this action on public access to health data.
Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, a commission member and former federal health official, is now a health policy expert at Johns Hopkins University. He stated that the commission is still awaiting an explanation. Researchers have noted that not only datasets and summaries were affected, but also codebooks used to explain data variables, and have observed alterations in published research using affected datasets.
O’Hara expressed her bewilderment at the vast extent of changes made. Many researchers are still investigating which data were changed or removed. As an example, a request made on Monday for certain data from the comprehensive survey by the U.S. Census Bureau on the daily lives of Americans returned a message that the section was “unavailable due to maintenance.”
Additionally, the CDC’s official public health data portal was completely taken offline on Friday but was reactivated over the weekend with a conspicuous yellow banner noting that modifications were underway to adhere to the executive orders issued by President Trump. Similarly, the Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from the CDC was restored, though at least one gender column was missing, along with its data documentation. When contacted, CDC officials did not respond immediately to requests for comments.
The removal of federal data by the Trump administration has resulted in an unprecedented challenge for researchers reliant on this information. This situation highlights the vulnerability of public data systems to political directives. The scientific community continues to watch closely, concerned about the implications such actions may have on the integrity and accessibility of public information.
