Tag: Jennifer Zeitzer

US election 2020: research and health institutions

Volume 396, Number 10259

24 October 2020

 

WORLD REPORT   How will the NIH, CDC, and FDA change if President Donald Trump wins a second term or if his Democratic challenger, Joe Biden, defeats him? Susan Jaffe reports from Washington, DC. 

Whoever wins the presidency needs to “restore the CDC and improve it by letting [scientists] know that they will have an opportunity to do the best science and make the best recommendations…” says James Curran, dean of the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University in Atlanta. [Continued here.]…

Trump administration limits fetal tissue research

Volume 393    Number 10189         15 June 2019   
WORLD REPORT    The move could threaten medical research advances, say scientists, as acquisition of new fetal tissue for research is substantially hindered. Susan Jaffe reports.              

“Many discoveries now in clinical practice and wide research use have come from human fetal tissue”, said Irving Weissman, director of the Stanford Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. “For these, there was—and still is—no substitute for human fetal tissue.”

…Anti-abortion groups praised the new policy, which would “separate federal research funding from the abortion industry”, said Melanie Israel, a research associate at the conservative Heritage Foundation… Yet how the new Trump research policy would reduce abortions is still unclear. “They are conflating pro-life issues and abortion with research”, said Jennifer Zeitzer, public affairs director at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. “But there’s no evidence that women are getting abortions so they can donate fetal tissue for research.”  [Continued here.]  …

Marching for science as budget cuts threaten US research

lancet cover 2Volume 389, Number  10080 

29 April 2017 

WORLD REPORT   Americans push back against President Trump’s proposed budget cuts… Susan Jaffe, The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, reports. 

President Donald Trump is famous for his early morning Tweets and off-the-cuff remarks that can sometimes be puzzling. But what he thinks about biomedical research and basic science is quite clear in his first proposed budget for running the federal government.

March for Science, Washington, D.C. / Susan Jaffe

Trump’s America First: A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again outlines a $1·1 trillion spending plan that would take effect when the new fiscal year begins in October. The president wants to move $54 billion from domestic agencies to fortify the US military. To help pay for the transfer, he is proposing funding cuts for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA; 31%) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH; 18%) [and other domestic agencies]….

To squeeze $5·8 billion out of the agency’s $30·3 billion budget, the Trump administration would reorganise NIH’s 27 institutes and centres and “rebalance federal contributions to research funding” according to the budget blueprint. …Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price told a congressional committee last month that the NIH could operate on a tighter budget by cutting the roughly 30% of grant money that pays for indirect research costs. These expenses can include rent, utilities, administrative staff, and equipment. “That money goes for something other than the research that’s being done”, Price said.

Price’s suggestion was especially disturbing coming from the person who is responsible for overseeing the NIH, said Harold Varmus, who directed the NIH in the 1990s and headed the National Cancer Institute at NIH for 5 years until 2015. “You can’t do research in the dark”, he said. “You can’t do research—at least my kind of research—without a building and without electricity and water and administrative expenses”. [Continued  here]

 …

NIH hopes funding increases will continue

 lancet cover 2Volume 387, Number  10019
13 February 2016
WORLD REPORT   The US National Institutes of Health welcomed a record budget boost that might be the start of more sustained support. The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, Susan Jaffe, reports.

The US Congress recently approved the largest single increase in funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 12 years—a US$2 billion raise that was twice as much as President Barack Obama requested. But almost as soon as NIH supporters stopped cheering, they began to worry about next year’s budget, and the challenge of a new public health threat, Zika virus.

NIH Director Francis Collins told The Lancet that the funding boost “was enormously gratifying”. But if it is “a one-hit wonder”, he said “it won’t be sufficient to take full advantage of the remarkable scientific opportunities and talent that is out there”.   [Continued here] [podcast here]

 …