Trump policy capping NIH indirect costs at 15% will cripple biomedical research

Doesn’t NSF have a similar defacto base rate, but rate could be negotiated?

A long time ago, in a land far away, Had an ex who had a funded nsf grant, but I have blocked most of that part fr9m my brain storage facility

 

Your friends Vladimir and Xi would agree.

 

Don't bring facts to emotional rants, they're summarily discharged by the TikTok voters

 

All that kind of base research that built the fundamentals for something like a company to build rockets to go to space or electric cars or something

 

what’s it called when you don’t know shit but comment like you do? Stinkin cons…

 

Um, you missed the initial post that I replied to…
Please keep up slayer.

 

May be true to extent. OTOH you might be surprised how much grant fund expenditures are vetted/scrutinized. I get on average two grants/year. Most are small-time travel funds, or perhaps for educational equipment. Every last penny gets documented and goes from department admin to college-level vetting and then to the university central admin. I have to provide a receipt for $2.50 ink pen and if it's not in the grant proposal, there's freaking hell to pay + it goes out my pocket. My guess is that the folks funding major science/med research are no less scrutinizing.

 

What's the big deal if China finds the cure for cancer before we do, gets rich, and is able to buy our country from Donald Trump for pennies on the dollar?

I'm sure I can learn a new language and fit right in the hard working Chinese autocracy better than the dumb, lazy, unqualified DEI Trump autocracy administration lackeys!

 

So true. Case in point . . .

 

all the grad students who work with grant money, support staff, many professors will have salaries cut, students on a bio-med track...it goes on and on. it could take a decade to recover.

 

you are better giving funds directly to a given department vs the University.

 

eh this is debatable. Some of the worst offenders of mismanaged grant funds are at the dept level. Who do you think polices how direct costs are spent responsibly? Central admin. And idc is intended to be covering overhead - doesn’t make sense for that to only go to a dept or researcher who have no idea how overhead is even calculated most of the time.

 

I know I’d welcome a Big Red Easy button on cancer, but after more than a half-century of furious research, and over a half-trillion dollars spent, I recently lost a friend to … treatment ?

In a still functional state, she was diagnosed with melanoma. What followed was radiation, chemo and massive doses of various medications.

Lost her hair, swollen beyond recognition, losing her mind, falling out of bed, thankfully perished in short order as it was a hellish experience for her family.

But she would have died without the treatment.

 

Can't quite meet you at big red button (suicide), but damn sure wouldn't so much as raise an ass cheek to pass gas, in terms of "treatment".

Prayer.

Alcohol.

Let life takes its course.

Pretty sure it ends in death no matter what you do. Death is literally, part of life. These last part. How it ends.

C'est la vie (literally).

 

The people I work for just lost an old friend to cancer. My take: there’s no cure for being 93.

 

I don't have a dog in that fight, as my research is not NIH sponsored. My point was that grant proposals tend to be carefully vetted and expenditures tend to be meticulously monitored.

 

Except for the funding that goes to the wuhan lab

 

Just a reminder: Article 2, section 3 “he [the President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

He doesn’t have the power to make laws or rules.