The Vanishing Point

The Vanishing Point is a documentary series about funding cuts to American science. The first episode of this series played theatrically at New York's IFC Center as part of Short Attention Span Cinema, which has also featured the New York Times Op-Docs and The Moth Radio Hour. 

​

The episode "NASA v. DOGE" is also available to watch on Crafty Short Films.

​

The Vanishing Point is a documentary series about the impact of funding cuts to the institution of American science. 

​

When my sister was diagnosed with brain cancer in June of 2024, cutting-edge science was our only hope. Her prognosis was dismal, and like many families facing a terminal diagnosis, we looked to novel treatments from clinical trials. 

​

Around the same time, I watched in disbelief as the Trump administration withdrew billions in NIH funding, including funding for cancer trials. Since 2025, biomedical research labs around the country have closed and more than 70,000 patients have been taken off of clinical trials. This includes children who had hoped to enroll in trials under the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium, which Trump's NIH closed in March 2026. Before its abrupt ending, the PBTC organized Phase 1 and Phase 2 trials for children with brain cancer for 30 years. 

​

The cuts to science went far beyond NIH trials. One particularly galling episode I witnessed was the eviction of NASA's GISS laboratory at Columbia University. I visited NASA’s GISS Lab during its final days, when scientists packed up decades of climate data and equipment to be sent to storage at taxpayer expense, while the government remains legally obliged to pay a ten-year lease. NOAA faced sweeping layoffs too, crippling both climate research and basic weather forecasting. “Government jobs are no longer secure,” Dr. Andrew Williams told me. “Universities also aren’t hiring. People are wondering what to do next.”

​

The effects reach beyond budgets. PhD student Samsara Upadhya saw her NIH grant, focused on cell replication, revoked for being part of a diversity supplement program. The research had "nothing to do with diversity at all," Upadhya explained. Her grant was canceled only because she had indicated that she was a diverse researcher. Her grant went through the same peer review and scored exceptionally well. 

​

Through these stories, I’m documenting the loss of expertise, collaboration, and imagination that took generations to build. And now, in 2026, there is cause for hope. The deepest of Trump's proposed cuts were rejected by Congress. Organizations like Stand Up For Science and the Weather and Climate Livestream are fighting back, bringing letters to Congress and advocating for the future of American science.