Among the numerous inaccuracies and misrepresentations in President Donald Trump‘s ongoing speech to Congress on Tuesday night, one assertion was particularly noteworthy. The President stated that the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) discovered an astonishing expenditure approved by the previous administration: an outrageous $8 million “for making mice transgender.”
The figure, much like several others cited by oligarch Elon Musk‘s government-reducing initiative, appears to have been fabricated. DOGE has had to remove many “receipts” for the purported billions in waste it claims to have found due to significant mistakes in its reporting. Last month, for example, it boasted about canceling an $8 billion contract that actually amounted to $8 million.
Regarding the “transgender” mice, it is likely that the Trump administration’s extensive campaign to eliminate language related to diversity, equity, and inclusion led them to misconstrue health studies involving “transgenic” mice—laboratory mice that have been genetically modified to better simulate human disease responses. These mice have been described as a “revolutionary research resource” for medical progress.
By removing specific words from federal documents, the administration has frequently discarded materials irrelevant to its culture war agenda, including a database that assists doctors in deciding whether to test pregnant women for HIV, along with portions of the IRS employee handbook that mention “inequity” and “inclusion” as financial terms. A clumsy or automated search for any reference to “trans” in medical documents might have mistakenly categorized “transgenic” studies.
Yet, the White House reinforced Trump’s assertion on Wednesday by sharing a government webpage that stated, albeit with slightly subdued wording: “Yes, Biden spent millions on transgender animal experiments.” As typical for DOGE, the webpage misrepresents expenditures to arrive at a fabricated figure. One line item, costing over $3 million, was research investigating how “sex-specific inflammatory mechanisms controlled by hormones” may influence asthma, and whether estrogens contribute to the higher rate of this chronic lung illness in women. A different hormone-related study, costing $1.2 million, did use “transgenic”—not transgender—mice. About $2.5 million was attributed to a fertility study. Another project explored the impact of gender hormones on the gut microbiome of mice. Among the highlighted research relevant to transgender health, there is a $300,000 study analyzing breast cancer risk for female-to-male trans individuals on testosterone. Once more, the mice utilized in clinical studies did not undergo any gender transition.
One single entry, listed at $455,000, pertained to researchers examining the immune response of mice treated with cross-hormone therapy, which might be the closest this list comes to an example of “making mice transgender.” However, it is clear that this was not the primary aim of their research.
It appears that the president’s anti-DEI advocates randomly flagged a selection of National Institutes of Health materials that included combinations of hormones, mice, gender, and terms prefixed with “trans,” subsequently compiling this into the oversimplified talking point that Trump presented on Tuesday night. When asked for evidence to support his comment, the White House referred back to the same disjointed compilation of studies. Therefore, you can be reassured that millions of taxpayer dollars were not squandered on “woke” research aimed at enforcing new gender identities on laboratory rodents—all highlighted expenditures were, in fact, focused on enhancing human health. That is the goal of medical researchers.
“I could find a cure to the most devastating disease,” Trump stated early in his Tuesday evening address, “and [Democrats] sitting right here will not clap, will not stand, and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements.” However, given the reckless funding cuts to the institutions and facilities conducting such critical research, there may be little reason for an ovation in the first place.
