And then there’s spaces of the market like multiple myeloma where they’ll pay for almost anything. Dara for low risk smoldering? Hell yeah.

Any real reform of NIH will make a lot of scientists cry-- the mediocre ones who thrive in the current system. Already many have taken a "sky is falling" view of even minor pauses. They pretend like study sections meet and then pass out money the next week. They pretend that

To my surprise, I’m completely in agreement with Kennedy when he calls for funding for replication studies. The fraudulent NIH Alzheimer’s research definitely impeded the search for treatments. The Field has totally failed to address this and focus on replication makes sense.

I think the best thing to come out of o3 for academia is that academics will have to try harder to be useful. It's not enough to write a paper that makes people nod and say, "This is an informative discussion of some issues related to topic X".

This is excellent, but too late. Science has squandered opportunity after opportunity to reimagine and fix itself. In not doing so it has betrayed and now lost the public trust. Changes are coming, and we are no longer in a position to dictate or control them. Nor, I'm sad to

science is cowardly turtles all the way down

I have yet to see academic scientists posting about how NIH/NSF funding of their work led directly to groundbreaking advances for humanity or even just mediocre improvements. Probably because most of it hasn't. Tbh, that would be an easy way to change people's minds.

Good! This was the greatest slush fund ever created. It made researchers with NIH dollars invincible. Universities shielding them at all costs, even when research was fraudulent. This money was used to support initiatives, which Americans rejected, like DEI training & admin

@ClausWilke I’d love an accounting of how indirect costs are spent and how efficient the spending is. Rather than this partisan cheerleading. Remember universities double dip on these funds. ie graduate students that cost a PI $100,000K in grant money, but 50%+ is “tuition and fees”

The indiscriminate and ill-conceived slashing of indirects by the NIH yesterday must be amended if want to restore America’s leadership role biomedical research. 15% simply isn’t enough for institutions to provide the basic infrastructure needed to run a successful lab. I say

Vinay Prasad MD MPH Yes, the taxpayers funded basic science research that underlie the development of these drugs. Then the drug companies charge exorbitant prices for those drugs to the same taxpayers who funded the research for their development. Take a look at the list of these drugs. Many of

If we want to thoughtfully reduce NIH indirect costs, we need to reduce the federal regulatory burden that causes universities to hire so many administrators to remain compliant.

They’re propping up big condom!!!

The irony of using NIH indirects to attack “woke” universities is that biomedical scientists are the least ideologically committed group on campus. They are as a collective consummate wind followers with no moral core who will abandon anything and anyone when placed under stress.

We are entering an era that will be defined by convinction in ones beliefs

Reading, and in particular, reading poetry and literature, is a technological process to strengthen the heart. ⬇️This is like saying riding a stationary bike is pointless because you can commute to work in your car.

The fact that in the wake of NIH cuts universities are gutting graduate admissions rather than trimming administrative bloat is very telling. Either they cannot be trusted to spend money properly, or they are making a political statement by directly affecting prospective

I am fully convinced 80% of oncology-focused biotechs could disappear and nothing of value would be lost.

I remember an inspiring lecture that Dr. Collins gave shortly after he discovered the CFTR gene in 1989. He should have stuck to molecular genetics and avoided opining in epidemiology, public policy, foreign relations, and pandemic management. Weighed against his great

Us not understanding biology is the main reason why most of drug development ends in failure.