Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research: The Case for the Scientist-Advocate
The U.S. biomedical research community finds itself at a particularly consequential moment. Since the end of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1998-2003 NIH budget doubling period, brought to fruition with bipartisan leadership, the Federal investment in biomedical research has been declining. The NIH budget has...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of dental research 2012-07, Vol.91 (7_suppl), p.S5-S7 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | S7 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7_suppl |
container_start_page | S5 |
container_title | Journal of dental research |
container_volume | 91 |
creator | Nurse, J.T.D. Fox, C.H. |
description | The U.S. biomedical research community finds itself at a particularly consequential moment. Since the end of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1998-2003 NIH budget doubling period, brought to fruition with bipartisan leadership, the Federal investment in biomedical research has been declining. The NIH budget has actually decreased in constant dollars since FY 2004. Across-the-board cuts included in the Budget Control Act of 2011 would result in a loss of $2.4 billion and roughly 2,300 research project grants in FY 2013 alone, unless Congress acts to intervene before January 2013. Many of the beneficiaries of NIH support view advocacy for research funding as “someone else’s job”. The case to reverse this mindset must be made. Members of Congress and their staffers are open to consideration of the case for sustaining Federal investments in science, even during these difficult budget times. However, the advocacy effort must be broad-based and repeatedly presented to effect change. The figures on economic return from spending on biomedical research are compelling, but they do not tell the entire story. The results of biomedical research improve and save lives every single day, a fact that should not be lost on our elected leaders. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0022034512450581 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1069204738</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0022034512450581</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1069204738</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-7552ad7a681b573d9b8ab2137db5e550c5e41c4b6e10a4cda885c49e27bd8ce83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kD1PwzAYhC0EoqGwM6EMDCwprx07tkeoKCBVQgI6R_54W1KlSbGbgX9PohYGJKYb7rmT7gi5pDChVMpbAMYg54IyLkAoekQSKjjPQGh6TJLBzgZ_RM5iXANQzVR-SkaMFVoXhUrI9axrfNWs0mUb0sXkbZLeV-0GfeVMnb5iRBPcxzk5WZo64sVBx2Qxe3ifPmXzl8fn6d08c0zDLpNCMOOlKRS1QuZeW2Uso7n0VqAQ4ARy6rgtkILhzhulhOMambReOVT5mNzse7eh_eww7spNFR3WtWmw7WJJodAMuMwHFPaoC22MAZflNlQbE756qBy-Kf9-00euDu2d7Rf-Bn7O6IFsD0SzwnLddqHp1_5f-A3TDGir</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1069204738</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research: The Case for the Scientist-Advocate</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Nurse, J.T.D. ; Fox, C.H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nurse, J.T.D. ; Fox, C.H.</creatorcontrib><description>The U.S. biomedical research community finds itself at a particularly consequential moment. Since the end of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1998-2003 NIH budget doubling period, brought to fruition with bipartisan leadership, the Federal investment in biomedical research has been declining. The NIH budget has actually decreased in constant dollars since FY 2004. Across-the-board cuts included in the Budget Control Act of 2011 would result in a loss of $2.4 billion and roughly 2,300 research project grants in FY 2013 alone, unless Congress acts to intervene before January 2013. Many of the beneficiaries of NIH support view advocacy for research funding as “someone else’s job”. The case to reverse this mindset must be made. Members of Congress and their staffers are open to consideration of the case for sustaining Federal investments in science, even during these difficult budget times. However, the advocacy effort must be broad-based and repeatedly presented to effect change. The figures on economic return from spending on biomedical research are compelling, but they do not tell the entire story. The results of biomedical research improve and save lives every single day, a fact that should not be lost on our elected leaders.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0345</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1544-0591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0022034512450581</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22699668</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Biomedical Research - economics ; Budgets - legislation & jurisprudence ; Dentistry ; Federal Government ; Financing, Government - economics ; Financing, Government - legislation & jurisprudence ; Humans ; National Institutes of Health (U.S.) - economics ; Patient Advocacy ; Research Support as Topic ; United States</subject><ispartof>Journal of dental research, 2012-07, Vol.91 (7_suppl), p.S5-S7</ispartof><rights>2012 International & American Associations for Dental Research</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-7552ad7a681b573d9b8ab2137db5e550c5e41c4b6e10a4cda885c49e27bd8ce83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022034512450581$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022034512450581$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22699668$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nurse, J.T.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fox, C.H.</creatorcontrib><title>Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research: The Case for the Scientist-Advocate</title><title>Journal of dental research</title><addtitle>J Dent Res</addtitle><description>The U.S. biomedical research community finds itself at a particularly consequential moment. Since the end of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1998-2003 NIH budget doubling period, brought to fruition with bipartisan leadership, the Federal investment in biomedical research has been declining. The NIH budget has actually decreased in constant dollars since FY 2004. Across-the-board cuts included in the Budget Control Act of 2011 would result in a loss of $2.4 billion and roughly 2,300 research project grants in FY 2013 alone, unless Congress acts to intervene before January 2013. Many of the beneficiaries of NIH support view advocacy for research funding as “someone else’s job”. The case to reverse this mindset must be made. Members of Congress and their staffers are open to consideration of the case for sustaining Federal investments in science, even during these difficult budget times. However, the advocacy effort must be broad-based and repeatedly presented to effect change. The figures on economic return from spending on biomedical research are compelling, but they do not tell the entire story. The results of biomedical research improve and save lives every single day, a fact that should not be lost on our elected leaders.</description><subject>Biomedical Research - economics</subject><subject>Budgets - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Federal Government</subject><subject>Financing, Government - economics</subject><subject>Financing, Government - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>National Institutes of Health (U.S.) - economics</subject><subject>Patient Advocacy</subject><subject>Research Support as Topic</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0022-0345</issn><issn>1544-0591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kD1PwzAYhC0EoqGwM6EMDCwprx07tkeoKCBVQgI6R_54W1KlSbGbgX9PohYGJKYb7rmT7gi5pDChVMpbAMYg54IyLkAoekQSKjjPQGh6TJLBzgZ_RM5iXANQzVR-SkaMFVoXhUrI9axrfNWs0mUb0sXkbZLeV-0GfeVMnb5iRBPcxzk5WZo64sVBx2Qxe3ifPmXzl8fn6d08c0zDLpNCMOOlKRS1QuZeW2Uso7n0VqAQ4ARy6rgtkILhzhulhOMambReOVT5mNzse7eh_eww7spNFR3WtWmw7WJJodAMuMwHFPaoC22MAZflNlQbE756qBy-Kf9-00euDu2d7Rf-Bn7O6IFsD0SzwnLddqHp1_5f-A3TDGir</recordid><startdate>20120701</startdate><enddate>20120701</enddate><creator>Nurse, J.T.D.</creator><creator>Fox, C.H.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120701</creationdate><title>Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research</title><author>Nurse, J.T.D. ; Fox, C.H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-7552ad7a681b573d9b8ab2137db5e550c5e41c4b6e10a4cda885c49e27bd8ce83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Biomedical Research - economics</topic><topic>Budgets - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Federal Government</topic><topic>Financing, Government - economics</topic><topic>Financing, Government - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>National Institutes of Health (U.S.) - economics</topic><topic>Patient Advocacy</topic><topic>Research Support as Topic</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nurse, J.T.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fox, C.H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of dental research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nurse, J.T.D.</au><au>Fox, C.H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research: The Case for the Scientist-Advocate</atitle><jtitle>Journal of dental research</jtitle><addtitle>J Dent Res</addtitle><date>2012-07-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>91</volume><issue>7_suppl</issue><spage>S5</spage><epage>S7</epage><pages>S5-S7</pages><issn>0022-0345</issn><eissn>1544-0591</eissn><abstract>The U.S. biomedical research community finds itself at a particularly consequential moment. Since the end of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1998-2003 NIH budget doubling period, brought to fruition with bipartisan leadership, the Federal investment in biomedical research has been declining. The NIH budget has actually decreased in constant dollars since FY 2004. Across-the-board cuts included in the Budget Control Act of 2011 would result in a loss of $2.4 billion and roughly 2,300 research project grants in FY 2013 alone, unless Congress acts to intervene before January 2013. Many of the beneficiaries of NIH support view advocacy for research funding as “someone else’s job”. The case to reverse this mindset must be made. Members of Congress and their staffers are open to consideration of the case for sustaining Federal investments in science, even during these difficult budget times. However, the advocacy effort must be broad-based and repeatedly presented to effect change. The figures on economic return from spending on biomedical research are compelling, but they do not tell the entire story. The results of biomedical research improve and save lives every single day, a fact that should not be lost on our elected leaders.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>22699668</pmid><doi>10.1177/0022034512450581</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-0345 |
ispartof | Journal of dental research, 2012-07, Vol.91 (7_suppl), p.S5-S7 |
issn | 0022-0345 1544-0591 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1069204738 |
source | Access via SAGE; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Biomedical Research - economics Budgets - legislation & jurisprudence Dentistry Federal Government Financing, Government - economics Financing, Government - legislation & jurisprudence Humans National Institutes of Health (U.S.) - economics Patient Advocacy Research Support as Topic United States |
title | Funding for U.S. Biomedical Research: The Case for the Scientist-Advocate |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T04%3A29%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Funding%20for%20U.S.%20Biomedical%20Research:%20The%20Case%20for%20the%20Scientist-Advocate&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20dental%20research&rft.au=Nurse,%20J.T.D.&rft.date=2012-07-01&rft.volume=91&rft.issue=7_suppl&rft.spage=S5&rft.epage=S7&rft.pages=S5-S7&rft.issn=0022-0345&rft.eissn=1544-0591&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0022034512450581&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1069204738%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1069204738&rft_id=info:pmid/22699668&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0022034512450581&rfr_iscdi=true |