Microsoft Windows Vista Community Forums - Vistaheads
Recommended Download

Welcome to the Microsoft Windows Vista Community Forums - Vistaheads, YOUR Largest Resource for Windows Vista related information.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so , join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Driver Scanner

Science World Won't Be Sorry to See Bush Go

General Technology News

Speedup My PC
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-04-2008
Steve's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Emerald Isle
Posts: 90,157
Steve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant futureSteve has a brilliant future
Thanks: 24
Thanked 181 Times in 45 Posts
Science World Won't Be Sorry to See Bush Go
News from

Also on Portfolio
Bring Me the Head of Jerry Yang
How Airlines Can Survive High Fuel Costs
Top Editor Quits Murdoch's Wall Street Journal

Subscribe to Portfolio magazine

In science, as in most things, you usually get what you pay for. Money doesn't always mean you get the best. Just ask the New York Yankees so far this season.
But when a nation has been the world leader at something as vital as, say, medical research and regulation, and annual funding is flat or declining when it used to go up, then money may matter.
The stakes for America were spelled out in a panel discussion held at the first-ever World Science Foundation last weekend in New York.
"I think there's a loss of American power and prestige that came about as a result of our anti-science policies," said biologist David Baltimore, a Nobel laureate and the chairman of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Harold Varmus, another Nobel laureate and the president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, decried the lack of attention being paid to advancing science even in the current presidential campaign. "The campaign so far has given too little attention to what science means for our own economy and our status in the world," he said.
This comes as reports and recommendations have been piling up describing the slowdown in research grants and projects at the National Institutes of Health since budgets began a decline in 2004.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science concluded last spring that five years of shrinking budgets have led to an institute that is "falling further and further behind the increasing challenges and costs of biomedical research."
Last week, the Senate voted to add $400 million tacked onto President Bush's 2009 budget. That is less than the $600 million Congress added to the budget in 2007 and 2008, but better than the zero percent increase asked for by the president.
Even more acute is the situation at the Food and Drug Administration, where a report from an advisory panel described an agency in such desperate need for funding that it is in a state of near dysfunction.
The report, issued by the agency's Subcommittee on Science and Technology in January, said that the F.D.A. "cannot fulfill its mission" in part "because its scientific workforce does not have sufficient capacity and capability."
The culprit, the panel concluded, was a lack of funding and resources for an agency that oversees virtually all food and drugs American's consume. F.D.A. regulates $1 trillion of the nation's economy with a budget of $2.27 billion in 2008—about $7.50 for every American. (See my column, F.D.A. on the Brink?)
Yet the president's budget provided only a minuscule increase in the budget of the Food and Drug Administration, up $50.7 million to a total of $2.4 billion. (This includes user fees paid by drug companies asking the F.D.A. to approve new drugs.) This anemic increase does not even cover salary increases, and is also supposed to pay for several hundred new inspectors and other personnel.
The situation is so dire that a few days ago Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach—a political appointee who serves at the pleasure of the president—appealed to Congress to raise his agency's budget $275 million above what his boss asked for.
Earlier, von Eschenbach faced a maelstrom of criticism of the administration's meager budget increase. He sent the request and detailed plan for spending it to Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who had asked von Eschenbach provide him with this information "to protect the public health."
According to The New York Times, Specter added in a handwritten note in the letter's margins: "Andy, I know the situation is extreme. I want to get you financial help now."
The Senate responded with a rather paltry increase of about $72 million for the F.D.A. Again, that's better than nothing, though the January report and others have called for much steeper increases, along with major reforms in how the agency is organized and how it works.
In a demonstration of how tough it is to get science funded in the Bush II era, Senate leaders tucked both budget increases into a $156 billion war and veterans' appropriations bill. That measure passed the Senate by a wide enough margin to override a threatened veto from the president. The House didn't include the raise in its version of the bill, but is expected to agree to the increase in conference.
Like so many other things, the task of recovering from Bush's distressing disinterest in science will be left to the next president.
Merely spending money, however, will not restore the waning prestige and power of American science, as articulated by Baltimore and Varmus. Nor will it insure that the life sciences in America will continue to produce breakthroughs and treatments that have benefited millions of people.
What is needed is leadership from the White House and Congress in ensuring that our federal medical research and oversight establishment is the best it can be, and that it's funding is adequate to as much benefit to people in the future as it has to generations past.

Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Microsoft Security Pro's have the 6th most worst Science job in the world ! WinVistaClub WinVistaClub Blog 0 05-28-2008 18:30
Science Text Attempts to Reconcile Religion and Science Steve General Technology News 0 01-05-2008 13:00
DNA science moves from crime world to art world Steve General Technology News 0 08-30-2007 21:40
DNA science moves from crime world to art world Steve General Technology News 0 08-30-2007 21:00

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:14.

Driver Scanner - Free Scan Now is part of the Heads Network. See also , and

Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin for
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120