health research

We applaud portions of the omnibus bill that support the nation’s research, innovation and public health ecosystem, which works to assure our future health and economic well-being. The growth in funding for the Food and Drug Administration, fueled in part by the common-sense return of the 2013 user fees, as well as the increases for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Science Foundation are welcome news. But funding for the National Institutes of Health has been kept well below the level of scientific opportunity. We must eliminate sequestration once and for all, and grow our investment in NIH in order to slow and...
Dear Research Advocate: Following the lead of Budget Chairs Murray (D-WA) and Ryan (R-WI-01), Appropriations Chairs Mikulski (D-MD) and Rogers (R-KY-05) are trying to end the recent string of continuing resolutions and craft a funding compromise that advances the nation’€™s best interests. Congress may miss its January 15 deadline for appropriations, but it won’€™t likely shut down the government. We anticipate a short-term extension of the deadline while appropriators in both chambers work to craft an omnibus bill that reflects today’€™s priorities instead of blind, across-the-board cuts. It’€™s about time, you’€™re thinking (and I agree!) that Congress gets back to ’€œregular order.’€...
Recently, progress has been made in Congress that must not be confused for victory but is momentum to be capitalized on. For instance, the bipartisanship and compromise that we’€™ve seen in Congress is the first step in a long journey that is necessary for medical and health research to flourish and which provides temporary relief from sequestration. Now is the time to carry forward. Advocates cannot tiptoe around other far-reaching truths: Our global competitiveness is at risk, young scientists are leaving the profession as fewer grants are awarded, Americans are dying, health care costs are exploding, and the facts prove it. Investing in innovation, at levels set to match and exceed...
Dear Research Advocate: Here’€™s a holiday surprise! I am not referring to the budget deal, but to the fact that Merriam-Webster’€™s 2013 word of the year ’€” determined via the greatest increase in online searches ’€” is “science.” I find this to be refreshing news, providing evidence that interest in science is growing, which in turn is an indication of substantial room for researchers and research advocates to contribute to public understanding and support of science. We appear to have an opportunity ready for the taking to overcome the “invisibility” problem that contributes to holding decision makers back from assigning a higher priority to science. And speaking of those decision...
December 18, 2013 ’€œSenate passage of the budget agreement brings us closer to restoring some of the funding lost under sequestration for medical and health research but this is a band-aid approach to solving our fiscal woes. Our nation’€™s research ecosystem has been a dealt a severe blow and will need robust funding to recover from steep budget cuts that slowed medical progress. We urge appropriators to adequately fund the National Institutes of Health and other agencies that advance scientific discovery and innovation to confront the many deadly and disabling diseases impacting our nation’€™s health and economy.’€
Federal R&D Funding Remains ’€œWoefully Inadequate’€ to Address Health Threats and Global Competitiveness Highlights: Overall health R&D spending in the U.S. increased by $4.3 billion (3.5%). Industry, philanthropy and voluntary associations led gains in R&D spending. Federal R&D spending rose 2.2% but a considerable amount is the result of agency reorganization and reclassification. ALEXANDRIA, Va.’€” December 17, 2013 ’€” After declining in FY10-11, health-related research and development (R&D) spending in the U.S. increased by $4.3 billion (3.5%) in FY11-12, according to Truth and Consequences: Health R&D Spending in the U.S. (FY11-12), the 10th edition from...
Dear Research Advocate: As I’€™m sure you’€™ve heard, the Joint Budget Committee released a two-year budget agreement Tuesday night. The package involves $63 billion in partial sequestration relief over two years, offset by fees (not taxes!) and a wide variety of cost-sharing arrangements, AKA ’€œpay fors.’€ While it remains unclear whether user fees will be subjected to any sequester in 2014 and 2015, the already-sequestered FDA user fees are locked up and cannot be used to accelerate medical advances. This is a missed opportunity that patients can’€™t afford. While not a perfect deal in many respects, the House is expected to approve the Murray-Ryan budget deal within moments, and the...
To protect medical and health research, policy makers must eliminate sequestration. This remains Research!America’€™s top-line message, because it is sequestration that poses the greatest threat to all discretionary funding, including medical and health research conducted by NIH, CDC, FDA, NSF, AHRQ, DOD ’€¦ and the list goes on. Advocates for medical and health research have made a huge impact over the years on funding and policies supportive of medical and health research, including playing a key role in reducing sequestration in 2013. We are asking you to weigh in again to help address sequestration in FY14 and FY15. On Wednesday, the co-chairs of the committee charged with establishing...
New National Poll Reveals Many Respondents Predict China will Surpass U.S. in Science and Innovation by 2020 ALEXANDRIA, Va.’€”December 3, 2013’€”Nearly two-thirds (65%) of Americans say it’€™s likely there will be another government shutdown in the months ahead as Congress continues to debate deficit and budget issues, according to a new national public opinion poll commissioned by Research!America and the American Society of Hematology. This sentiment is shared across party affiliations: Democrats (66%), Republicans (65%) and Independents (65%). There is also consensus across party lines that government dysfunction has consequences. A majority of Americans (57%) say the shutdown in...
Dear Research Advocate: Yesterday I learned that China is offering to pay full freight for students from developing countries who are interested in receiving their university degree in China. China is also, as you know, investing hand over fist in research and development, life science research in particular. Juxtapose China’€™s science, STEM education and science-diplomacy policies with U.S.policies: we don’€™t seem to have them! And contrast their funding strategy with ours: we’€™re disinvesting while they’€™re planning to outspend us within the next five years. So why does it matter where science is pursued? Why does it matter if the U.S. focuses on other priorities for awhile or forever...

Pages

Sidebar Quote

We have health challenges in this country that science will provide answers for if given the chance and we haven't given science that opportunity
Mary Woolley, President and CEO, Research!America