Tag Archives: national science foundation

A Weekly Advocacy Message from Research!America: First things first

Dear Research Advocate:

Washington isn’t ignoring research; far from it. Legislation was recently signed into law that allows appropriators to reallocate federal funding from the Republican and Democratic conventions to children’s health research; proposals have been introduced that could ultimately provide supplemental federal funding streams for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and several other health research programs; and some Members of Congress have once again launched an attack on the National Science Foundation, demonizing certain projects as a means of casting doubt on scientific freedom. Unless you’re playing Jeopardy!, answers do not precede questions. Science without freedom is not science. More on that in future letters.

Washington isn’t ignoring research, but the spotlight keeps missing the most pressing question: Will Congress do something now to accelerate medical progress, or will FY15 mark another year of neglect?

The NIH budget is lower today than it was in 2012. How have we fallen so far behind? Is it no longer important to conquer diseases that kill children, to do more for wounded warriors, to stop devastating conditions like Alzheimer’s and cancer? Continue reading →

Advertisements

Sequestration Forces Scientist To Euthanize His Genetically Modified Rabbits

Excerpt of an article published in The Huffington Post with first-hand accounts of how sequestration is impacting scientific research.

When The Huffington Post published an in-depth look at how budget cuts were affecting scientific research, we encouraged readers to offer reactions and share personal experiences.

Responses varied. There were some in the political world, primarily conservatives, who believed the issue was overblown. Funding for the National Institutes of Health, they noted, remained robust at $29 billion. And while the agency’s budget has decreased because of sequestration, it is still dramatically higher than it was under Bill Clinton, even when adjusted for inflation.

Reactions from academics and advocates were decidedly different. If anything, they thought the piece undersold the problem. Michael Lubell, Director of Public Affairs at the America Physical Society, one of the world’s largest organizations of physicists, noted that the NIH budget “stagnated and in purchasing power declined significantly” in the past few years. And it isn’t just the NIH feeling the pinch, he added. The Department of Energy, National Science Foundation, and other government agencies are all slashing support for grants.

The most illustrative feedback, however, came from scientists, researchers and students from throughout the country who offered their own personal experiences with funding cuts, ranging from being forced to move their families to other countries to find work, to euthanizing the bunnies on which they’d been conducting experiments. Continue reading →

Stadium Expansion at the University of Nebraska Includes Concussion Research Facility

The University of Nebraska isn’t the first school to integrate academic concussion research into its football program; the Matthew Gfeller Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has performed groundbreaking work for years now, and the Virginia Tech/Wake Forest School of Biomedical Engineering and Sciences has made incredible strides in understanding if and how football helmets can protect against concussions.

Nebraska is the latest entrant; the hope is that the school’s Center for Brain, Biology and Behavior can lead to further understanding and better diagnosis of traumatic brain injury. The center — CB3 as it’s known, according to this Associated Press story — will be located within a newly expanded portion of Memorial Stadium, where the Cornhusker football team plays its home games. The video above details the CB3 and other features of the expansion. Continue reading →

Statement from Research!America President and CEO Mary Woolley on President Obama’s FY14 Budget Proposal

The president’s FY14 budget proposal offers a lifeline for medical research to replace sequestration’s damaging footprints. The budget includes $31.3 billion for the National Institutes of Health, as well as increases for the Food and Drug Administration and National Science Foundation. These increases would take our nation in the right direction, but we’re concerned that budget proposals from Congress – one from each of the House and Senate – unlike the president, fail to reverse sequestration. Sequestration, 10 years of across-the-board spending cuts, will drag our nation down from its leadership position in research and development as other countries aggressively ramp up investments, attracting American businesses and young scientists concerned that federal funding is on the decline, that the U.S. no longer prioritizes research. Policy makers must start acting in the best interests of this nation and tackle tax and entitlement reform to end sequestration.

Our nation has the most sophisticated medical research ecosystem in the world; yet our elected officials have ignored the short- and long-term consequences of dismantling it via sequestration – more deaths from preventable diseases, increased joblessness and soaring health care costs as more Baby boomers become afflicted with Alzheimer’s, cancer, heart disease and other life-threatening, costly illnesses.

While the president’s budget increases federally-funded medical research, Congress and the administration must look more deeply into the consequences of dramatic cuts to Medicare Parts B and D, which cover crucial medical innovations including prescription drugs, biologics, and medical devices.  If Medicare undervalues these preventative, diagnostic, and treatment tools, access and innovation will both suffer. The counterproductive effect of slowed innovation and access barriers could be increased hospital and other health care costs. We’re also disappointed that the president’s budget cuts funding for the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention which is already operating on a severely depleted budget.  Cuts to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality which identifies waste and duplication in our health care system while combating deadly medical errors are also a strategic mistake.  Policymakers must tread carefully in the coming weeks to avoid decision-making that will endanger the health and economic prosperity of our country.

# # #

Updated: Sequestration impact on federally funded research programs

Just released data from the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) details the final amount to be cut from federal research program budgets as sequestration goes into effect. The full details are available on the updated Research!America sequestration fact sheet, though previous projections were relatively accurate as compared to these final numbers.

Cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration will be higher than previously expected, with a combined loss of $593 million dollars for FY13. That amount is roughly equivalent to ensuring the safety of new medical and biological products at the FDA and programs that focus on prevention of HIV/AIDS at CDC. The National Institutes of Health will lose more than $1.5 billion this year alone, enough to fund three major research programs at the National Cancer Institute. The National Science Foundation will lose $290 million, an amount that would almost fully fund the NSF budget for materials research, which includes studies on biomaterials and metallic nanostructures.