Tag Archives: University of California
The Genetics Policy Institute, a Research!America member, will honor the 2013 winners of its Stem Cell Action Awards at the World Stem Cell Summit, which runs December 4-6 in San Diego.
The Leadership Award will be given to successful businessmen and noted philanthropists Denny Sanford and Malin Burnham. They are honorary trustees of the Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute, of course, but their philanthropy extends far beyond that one institution.
The National Advocacy Award will be given to stem cell researcher Paul Knoepfler, PhD, an assistant professor at the University of California, Davis. Knoepfler’s blog is a crucial resource for stem cell science and advocacy. (Research!America won the National Advocacy Award in 2011.)
The Education Award will be given to Mary Ann Leibert, president and CEO of the Mary Ann Leibert, Inc., which publishes more than 100 peer-reviewed journals in science and biomedical research. The company’s flagship publication, Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (GEN), began in 1980 and is now recognized as an industry leader. Continue reading →
By Dai Horiuchi, PhD and Bradley Webb, PhD, co-leaders of the Science Advocacy Subgroup and organizing members of the Science Policy Group at the University of California, San Francisco (a Research!America member).
The Science Policy Group (SPG) at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) is determined to take advantage of this crisis situation brought about by the sequester to speak up for the future of academic biomedical science in America. We’re composed of a dedicated group of life sciences graduate students and postdoctoral scholars. Our primary mission is to educate ourselves as well as the general public about policy issues and to take actions for the advancement of science and human health. The SPG is composed of five subgroups; Science Advocacy, Science Education, Science Outreach, Science Reform, and Health Care Reform. The Advocacy Subgroup was formed in response to the sequester, the across-the-board budget cut, which has significantly decreased scientific funding since it went into effect earlier this year. It appeared that only those PIs and postdoctoral scholars whose federal grant applications (i.e. RO1s, K-awards, etc) were under consideration were aware of the potential consequences of the sequester. However, a majority of trainees had no knowledge of what the sequester entailed. It was not until grant applicants were unusually delayed and an abnormal number of grants, scholarships and fellowships were denied funding that people started paying attention. Continue reading →