The National Institute of Health was immediately cut on February 7th. About $ 4 billion annually We support funds for biomedical researchers nationwide. This measure is reduced to 15 %of the NIH subsidies paid by “indirect” costs (LAB maintenance, management and operation). The historical ratio is almost halfovernight.
In this announcement, NIH said in 2023 that $ 9 billion, which spent about $ 350 billion in 300,000 researchers in 2023, was indirectly expensive. He insisted that turning indirect costs to low costs is more consistent with what was implemented by the private foundation.
On February 10, I responded to 22 states I filed a federal lawsuit“To protect the state and residents from the illegal actions of the National Institute of Health (‘NIH’), which devastated important public health research in universities and research institutes in the United States and research institutes. “
To support science journalism
If you are enjoying this article, support the award -winning journalism. accession. By purchasing subscriptions, it will help you to ensure the future of influential stories about finding the world today and the idea of an influential story about ideas.
Donald Trump proposed to reduce NIH’s indirect costs. 10 % in 2017But I faced Parliamentary resistance. Like then, a newly proposed cut has been triggered. A wide range of criticisms From scientists Endangers patient US strategic advantage of research. Professor Theodore Iwashyna, Professor of Johns Hopkins University I told CNN.
Indirect costs for laboratory subsidies are long It caused complaints From scientists 2014 nature analyze “Overall, data supports the manager’s claim that the actual recovery of indirect costs is often lower than the negotiated fee.”
Scientific All medical degrees in the United States -A dialogue with David Skorton in the Association of American Medical College, affecting this change and medicine.
[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]
How did this affect those who have never heard of “indirect” NIH subsidies, but who can benefit from better medicine?
Therefore, ideas for biotechnology are multiple. Some of them help to understand how life works. Ten years of study showed that Messenger RNA, a basic building block of biology, could actually be used as a platform for vaccines. The knowledge is very basic and very basic, and eventually supplied to the development of operating speed and vaccine for cobid. So that’s one thing.
Then there is a research project that can be called application research, such as cancer clinical trials. Unfortunately, someone has cancer, and a basic study shows that new approaches, such as immunotherapy, can be used to fight cancer cells using the immune system. We have to find out and go to human clinical trials. These clinical trials are also research projects. And there is a research project related to the diagnosis of disease. It does not handle it. I studied in the early stages of processing computer processing medical images in the cardiovascular system. The idea could lead to a faster way to develop a better diagnostic technology and diagnose the disease. So that you can know the correct treatment.
All of that clearly have different requirements. Basic studies often require a laboratory with complicated and expensive laboratory, correct water, utility and functions. And there are five research groups in the laboratory, and all are studying different questions. Therefore, individual research groups that carry out individual projects [NIH] funds. In the case of the entire laboratory itself, the execution cost, utility, everything is actually applied to all projects, so it cannot be exactly matched in one project. Therefore, physical laboratory operations, utility costs, and libraries that back up are considered so -called facilities and management costs and sometimes called indirect costs.
Decades ago, the federal government periodically and carefully and carefully, the university, which was studying the medical school or the university, came up with the idea of finding out how much money is actually spent on something like high -tech laboratory. [equipment]High -speed data processing, security, data storage. And they are repaid through facilities and administrative costs or indirect costs.
To clarify this, these costs are necessary to conduct research.
These are all important for running laboratory in college. They are not just the same as individual pipettes. This feature is needed to run a library, data center, laboratory. The federal government has a cautious audit system because it recognizes that subsidies themselves are actually supporting funds for specific problems they are studying. But to study a lot of problems, you need this infrastructure. No, it’s not frill.
What happens if you cut this kind of money?
In fact, if the facility management cost is very seriously cut, as NIH announced, the laboratory will literally darken. The research will stop. A march of knowledge that someone, relatives, friends, neighbors, and colleagues survive in the disease, or live his life after an accident. They will suffer Because research cannot continue. Indirect costs are not frill, and NIH subsidies are not completely paid for research.
And that is intention. Decades after the NIH subsidies, we built a huge biopsyte research giant in the United States. These indirect costs are the way we did.
Exactly right. But companies have not been constructed only for proud rights. It was built to serve Americans.
What is the content compared to the indirect cost of the Foundation subsidy in the NIH announcement? Is it a fair comparison?
We have Something online about thisBut some high points: the Foundation often allows more flexibility than the federal government does to allow administrative costs. So it is an apple and an orange comparison. And the Foundation often focuses on other research from the federal government. When thinking about the difference, that is, what can the Federal government can pay for direct costs? .
