Call on your house representatives to support a FY2026 budget bill that would preserve funding for NIH at the Senate Appropriations Committee approved level of $48.7B and adopt Senate language prohibiting a cap on indirect costs and limiting multi-year funded grants to levels consistent with FY2024
Proud to participate in #RallyMedRes to advocate for biomedical research funding together with over 400 participants from 39 states. Inspiring speeches by Senator Tammy Baldwin and Katie Couric about the critical importance of NIH funding for basic research that leads to cures for disease. #FUNDNiH
Someone hacked my X account which i havent used for a year and locked me out. Impossible to get through to x. Very frustrating!
It's time to submit abstracts for ASHG 2025! It's going to be a fantastic meeting in Boston. Hope to see you there!
www.ashg.org/meetings/202...
It is so disturbing what they are doing. They are literally destroying the scientific enterprise in the US which will set us back for decades.
GGHE is co-hosting a hybrid symposium highlighting the importance of including diverse populations in human genomics research from May 14 - May 15. Registration is free!
Well deserved!
Proud to stand up for science on the steps of the Tennessee state capital in Nashville! #standupforscience
Meant to say #standupforscience
I ran across this beautifully written opinion piece from a writer in Kansas.
A darkness has descended on America. We must seek the air and light of hope. kansasreflector.com/2025/02/09/a...
Stand Up For Science 2025 Announces National Day of Action
WHO: Everyone! If your life is better because of science, this rally is for you.
WHERE: Washington, DC & state capitals nationwide
WHEN: March 7, 2025
Forthcoming details about local rallies: www.standupforscience2025.org
Hope so. I'm wondering who will stop them if they just choose to ignore.
They're the same thing. NIH refers to them as indirects.
Joni, it is heartbreaking for so many, including those students and postdocs who had grants taken out from under them. But we have to stay strong and act in unison and we will get through this. We need more women in science so I hope your daughter will stick it out. Best wishes to her.
Journal subscriptions would be direct if allowed. Equipment can also go on direct but often the funders don't allow so the University has to cover it off of indirects.
I see your point Chanda but the metaphor was meant to highlight how truly devastating this policy will be and it will destroy science in our country. But point taken.
Barb, they are the costs that aren't used directly in the lab but are used for infrastructure costs. Without them, there would be no lab to work in.
Didn't mean to scare you!
I feel your pain. Have had the same conversations.
These actions will cause the U.S. to fall behind countries like China in scientific innovation which damages our economy, our health, and our national security.
This is the time to invest in science, not destroy it.
Find your local representatives here: www.faseb.org/partnerships...
Contact your local representatives and governor TODAY to oppose this disastrous policy. In the next few weeks, we are likely to hear about massive layoffs of federal employees at government science organizations and decreases to funding....
This new policy not only impacts education, but it will slow progress on diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, heart disease, and diabetes.
What can you do?
The economic ripple effects will be severe and devastating.
What about elite private universities with large endowments? Their resources won’t be enough to cover these cuts. Public universities, especially in red states, will suffer the most, damaging education and local economies...
Biomedical research institutions are major local employers. Take the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia’s largest employer—this policy threatens jobs across multiple sectors, such as health care, construction, food services and cleaning staff....
The reality is that biomedical research institutions will not be able to function on 15% overhead for all grants.
Why should you care?
Because NIH funding is so competitive (they are often funding only the top 10% of grants), these grants from small foundations can be life saving for small research labs and the University often helps to offset the costs...
However, I estimate that private foundations contribute less than 2% of biomedical research funding, and their grants are meant to supplement NIH funding that has historically covered indirect costs...
Universities already struggle to break even, with grants offices stretched thin. The government claims that institutions accept private foundation grants (like those from the Gates Foundation) with a 15% indirect rate, so they can manage NIH grants the same way....
Most institutions cannot absorb this loss, leading to devastating impacts on research and local economies.
Some might argue that NIH funds should go primarily to research, not administration. But without indirect funding, research grinds to a halt...
