Rogers Attacked El-Sayed Over 2012 Research Essay
The Senate candidate criticized his opponent for remarks made in a 2012 op-ed regarding research funding priorities.
Updated on Oct. 5, 2026 in Cancer
Live Poll
Should federal medical research funding prioritize disease lethality over the success of patient advocacy groups?
In a recent campaign advertisement, Mike Rogers highlighted a 2012 op-ed by Abdul El-Sayed to question his opponent's stance on breast cancer research funding. The move has prompted fact-checking by Bridge Michigan as the two candidates compete for a US Senate seat.
Why it matters
The campaign advertisement targets El-Sayed's past commentary on medical research allocations to argue that his priorities regarding patient advocacy are disqualifying for a future senator.
In 2025, the National Cancer Institute allocated $1.58 billion to breast cancer research, which has a 91.7% five-year survival rate, compared to $62 million for small cell lung cancer, which faces a 9.1% survival rate.
The players
Mike Rogers
Mike Rogers is a candidate currently competing for a seat in the United States Senate.
Abdul El-Sayed
Abdul El-Sayed is a candidate running for the US Senate who previously wrote an op-ed about research funding.
Bridge Michigan
Bridge Michigan is an independent news organization that provided fact-checking regarding the advertisement claims.
National Cancer Institute
The National Cancer Institute is the federal agency responsible for cancer research funding allocations.
The details
Mike Rogers and Abdul El-Sayed are currently locked in a race for a US Senate seat, leading to heightened scrutiny of their past public statements. The Rogers campaign claims that El-Sayed’s 2012 essay criticized patient advocates, though the accuracy of these characterizations is now being debated.
Timeline
Abdul El-Sayed wrote an essay regarding research funding in 2012.
The National Cancer Institute distributed research funding throughout 2025.
Estimates indicate 322,000 breast cancer and 118,500 lung cancer cases for 2026.
The US Senate election is scheduled for November 3, 2026.
The Big Picture
This dispute centers on the National Cancer Institute's annual research funding allocation process and how public figures characterize the distribution of federal resources.
While the political debate focuses on past rhetoric, voters may need to evaluate how federal funding decisions directly affect the development of treatments for high-mortality cancers. Understanding these historical allocations helps residents gauge which candidate's platform better aligns with their long-term health priorities.
The takeaway
Discussions on medical funding often involve balancing resources across different types of diseases with varying survival rates. Voters are encouraged to look past campaign rhetoric to understand the complex economic realities of how national health research is funded.
Further reading
Learn more about federal research priorities in the Cancer section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Bridge Michigan.
Live Poll
Should federal medical research funding prioritize disease lethality over the success of patient advocacy groups?
