Tuesday, October 6. 2009Collins: NIH Not the National Institutes of Basic SciencesTrackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
That's news to me. The NIH funds a lot of basic science. It's easy: just tack a sentence or two on the end of your grant. All it has to say is "this research may contribute to the development of treatments for disease X" because of a completely hypothetical link between the research and the disease and you're golden. If it doesn't pan out, find a new disease when you go to renew your grant. Collins' statement doesn't mean much.
Basic science needs to be funded because it provides the raw knowledge that breeds medical advancements (a fact too often overlooked by arrogant medical doctors). Human ESCR shouldn't be funded, not because it is or isn't relevant to clinical research, but because it's intrinsically evil. The reason it's being funded? I'll use the appropriate scientific terminology: it's "sexy".
Yep. Having written successfully for NIH money to fund a very basic-science, applicans-in-distant-future MD/PhD project, I can affirm DD's comment. Most likely Collins meant that NIH shouldn't be ONLY for basic science.
|
Follow or Contact me![]() marymeetsdolly [dot] com QuicksearchRecent Entries
ArchivesBlogs of Interest
Warning many of the following blogs are not Catholic or pro-life! My ears are burning..."great title, very informative site/blog" -- Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex "Cool blog! ...I like your honest and smart style..." -- Glenn McGee" "A must for every pro-lifer's bookmarks." -- Fr. Tim Finigan "really worth talking about" -- GOP Soccer Mom "She knows her stuff..." -- Spinal Confusion "a valuable resource" -- Amy Welborn "a must read for any Catholic or Medical Ethicist" -- Tomfoolery of a Seminarian "She's charitable AND loyal to the team. What a gal!" -- Amateur Catholics "For the love of little green apples!" -- Sailorette Categories |