Tag: Research!America
Biden’s science adviser resigns over bullying
Volume 399, Issue 10326
19 February 2022
WORLD REPORT Experts say that Eric Lander’s resignation should not affect the President’s plans to reboot the cancer moonshot project. Susan Jaffe reports.…
$6·5 billion proposed for new US health research agency
Volume 397, Issue 10288
22 May 2021
WORLD REPORT The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health would fund high-risk, high-reward medical research, but its short-term planning could stymie basic research. Susan Jaffe reports.
During his first address to a joint session of Congress last month, US President Joe Biden drew little applause from Republicans in the physically distanced, masked audience. A rare exception to their steadfast silence came when he unveiled an ambitious plan to eradicate cancer.
To help reach this goal, Biden would establish a new biomedical research agency within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) called the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H). The agency would provide a fast track for transforming basic science into real-world applications. [Continued here.]
…
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.]…
Prospects for health after the US mid-terms
Volume 392, Number 10161
24 November 2018
WORLD REPORT After the mid-term elections, Susan Jaffe, The Lancet‘s Washington correspondent, looks at the consequences for health-care legislation in the USA.
In the first national election since Donald Trump won the presidency promising, among other things, to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Americans went to the polls this month still concerned about health care. It was the most important issue for 75% of Democrats and 23% of Republicans who voted in the Nov 6 elections, according to exit polls. But, unlike in 2016, voters handed Democrats—the party responsible for the ACA—their largest victory since Republican Richard Nixon resigned as president after the Watergate scandal….
“Health care was on the ballot and health care won”, said the House of Representatives’ Democratic minority leader Nancy Pelosi of California, who is expected to become speaker of the house when the new Congress convenes in January. [Continued here.]
… Science appointments in the USA
Volume 389, Number 10088
24 June 2017
WORLD REPORT Slow appointments and vacant positions in federal agencies challenge the stability of research in the USA. Susan Jaffe, The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, reports.
As President Donald Trump rolls out his domestic agenda, his proposed budget cuts and lingering vacancies in key federal agencies have rattled some people in the biomedical research and science community.
“This has been the most anxious time in science that I have seen in this country”, said Rush Holt, chief operating officer at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), which represents 250 scientific societies and academies serving 10 million members. Holt cited a litany of reasons: “fake news” that distorts science, “policy making based on wishful thinking rather than evidence, funding proposals that are nonsensical, and unfilled positions in government agencies”. [Continued here]
…
Democrats back Clinton, progressive platform at DNC in Philadelphia
Susan Jaffe | Washington Correspondent for The Lancet | 29 July 2016
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders stressed the need for unity when he addressed the convention on its first day, citing the Democratic party platform as evidence of the gains his supporters have achieved. “It is no secret that Hillary Clinton and I disagree on a number of issues … that’s what democracy is about,” Sanders told the convention. “But I am happy to tell you that at the Democratic Platform Committee, there was a significant coming together between the two campaigns and we produced, by far, the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party.” [continued here] [listen to podcast here]…
US presidential candidates urged to support health research
Volume 387, Number 10037
18 June 2016
WORLD REPORT Advocates for medical research are eager to hear how the presidential candidates would advance the search for new treatments. Susan Jaffe, The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, reports.
As the most tumultuous presidential primary season in recent times comes to an end, biomedical researchers, physicians, and advocacy groups want the candidates campaigning for the White House to address some of the substantive matters they worry about: National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, advancing Alzheimer’s disease research, speeding up drug development, and a host of research related issues.
… In New Hampshire last year, the campaigns provided a preview of the kind of discussion between candidates and voters that research and patients’ advocacy groups would like. It revealed a stark difference between Clinton and Trump on funding for Alzheimer’s research and support for those caring for the 5·4 million Americans stricken with the disease. [Continued here]
…
21st Century Cures Act progresses through US Congress
Volume 385, Issue 9983, 30 May 2015
WORLD REPORT A bill to speed up the translation of biomedical discoveries is getting wide support, but some argue that it is not adequately funded. Susan Jaffe, The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, reports.
An ambitious bipartisan plan to accelerate medical innovation in the USA is moving ahead in a Congress famous for political gridlock.
The proposed 21st Century Cures Act was approved unanimously on May 21 by the US House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce. The massive bill would promote discovery of new medicines and get them to patients more quickly. But the bill’s bipartisan support nearly collapsed when Democrats insisted on additional funds for the two federal agencies intricately involved in carrying out the bill’s far-reaching provisions.
Behind-the-scenes discussions finally yielded an infusion of US$10 billion over 5 years for the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Shortly before the committee vote, $550 million over 5 years was added for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for ensuring new treatments are safe and effective. …But funding for both agencies did not come easy, is still uncertain, and might fall far short of what is needed. [Continued full text or PDF]…
NIH budget shrinks despite Ebola emergency funds
Volume 385, Issue 9966, 31 January 2015
WORLD REPORT Even with a boost in funding for Ebola research, the US National Institutes of Health’s fiscal year 2015 budget is the lowest in years. Susan Jaffe, The Lancet’s Washington correspondent, reports.
During last year’s contentious congressional hearings investigating the US response to Ebola, the Obama Administration’s top health officials fended off criticism hurled by both Democrats and Republicans. But in another show of bipartisanship only a few weeks later, Congress granted nearly all of President Barack Obama’s request for emergency funding to combat the disease here and abroad.
NIH Director Francis Collins
In his State of the Union address earlier this month, the President expressed his appreciation: “In west Africa, our troops, our scientists, our doctors, our nurses, and health-care workers are rolling back Ebola—saving countless lives, and stopping the spread of disease”, he said, drawing applause from both sides of the aisle. “I couldn’t be prouder of them, and I thank this Congress for your bipartisan support of their efforts.”
Congress narrowly approved the US$5·4 billion emergency Ebola funding contained in the $1·1 trillion spending bill that kept the US Government running. But so far, it has done little to loosen the budget constraints on the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—even as a global health crisis such as Ebola reminded many lawmakers of its value. [MORE full text or PDF ] …