As the Trump Administration Deletes Online Data, Scientists and Digital Librarians Rush to Save Vital Information

Researchers scramble to preserve public health and scientific data as federal websites vanish under the Trump administration's directives.

Under the Trump administration, drastic changes are unfolding that threaten to erase critical scientific and health-related data previously available to the public. These changes are causing a ripple effect across government institutions, affecting scientific research, public health information, and even the language used in federal publications. From websites disappearing to restrictions on the words federal scientists can use in research, experts in digital archiving and data preservation are urgently working to safeguard this invaluable information before it vanishes forever.

One of the most significant developments is the suspension of public health publications. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a key player in public health communication, has halted its flagship report, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), for the first time in over 60 years. This suspension comes alongside a broader gag order that prevents CDC scientists from sharing any new research findings, including crucial discoveries related to cancer treatments and infectious diseases like Ebola.

A particularly contentious issue involves a list of terms now banned from use in CDC research papers. These terms, which include "gender," "transgender," "pregnant person," "LGBT," "non-binary," and "biologically male," have been removed from papers under consideration by scientific and medical journals. The government's directive also includes the removal of references to these terms in already-published articles. For example, a search of the PubMed database, which hosts over a million biomedical and life sciences papers, reveals that hundreds of thousands of studies use these terms, indicating how widespread their impact is on ongoing research.

The implications of these actions are far-reaching. Studies related to gender health, LGBTQ+ issues, and medical demographics are at risk of being retracted or censored, threatening the credibility and completeness of ongoing medical research. The ban on such terms also risks undermining critical data on health disparities and population health trends, which are essential for informed medical and policy decision-making.

Meanwhile, as the administration's orders take effect, many federal health websites are being wiped from the internet in real-time, sparking concern among scientists, researchers, and digital archivists. To combat this digital erasure, experts like Charles Gaba, a healthcare policy analyst, are taking swift action to preserve this data. Gaba has created links to archived copies of CDC web pages stored on the Internet Archive, an independent nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving online content. Through his efforts, he is helping to ensure that publicly-funded research remains accessible to future generations.

In addition to Gaba's efforts, other organizations are also working to save federal data. The End of Term (EOT) Archive, a collaboration of institutions that tracks government website changes after each U.S. presidential election, has been actively collecting and preserving federal data from the Trump administration. The archive’s comprehensive web crawls have captured critical government web content, including health and science data that is rapidly disappearing.

However, digital archivists like Mark Phillips of the University of North Texas Libraries have noted that the pace of change in the federal web landscape has been more intense than expected. Phillips, who works with the EOT Archive, said that the amount of disappearing or altered content has been unprecedented. Researchers and journalists are encouraged to download important datasets or publications while they are still available to safeguard critical information for future use.

One alarming trend that has emerged is the potential alteration of historical data once it is reposted online. As Gaba pointed out, the efforts to rewrite history can be compared to the memory holes in George Orwell’s 1984, where references to the past are systematically destroyed to facilitate government control over the narrative. In the case of the Trump administration, the fear is not just that data will be erased, but that when it is restored, it may be tampered with to fit a revised, potentially misleading narrative.

The situation highlights the broader risks associated with digital censorship and the fragility of online data. When government websites are deleted or modified without notice, the historical record becomes susceptible to manipulation or erasure. This raises questions about transparency, the free flow of information, and the integrity of public health and scientific research.

As these efforts to preserve federal data continue, the importance of citizen involvement in safeguarding valuable information becomes increasingly apparent. The Internet Archive, which has been a vital tool in this fight, offers free services to allow individuals to capture and archive important web content. This grassroots effort is helping to build a digital safety net to prevent further erosion of public knowledge.

In conclusion, the race to preserve essential federal data has become a crucial battle in the face of growing political censorship. As digital librarians, researchers, and concerned citizens continue their efforts to protect this data, the future of scientific research, public health, and historical accuracy remains uncertain. The actions of the Trump administration are leaving a profound mark on the landscape of American knowledge, and the need for preservation has never been more urgent.