# Proposed cut to publicly-funded research (NIH)

1. Mar 21, 2017

Dr. Steven Novella contributes to a couple blogs I frequent:

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/

A recent post addresses proposed budget cuts1 and the need for publicly-funded research:

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-need-for-publicly-funded-science/
For those members of PF who rely on public funding for their research, I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this. Do you believe private funding will be an option? If not, will you be able to continue your research?

Will the private sector be able to make up for the proposed cuts? I have no doubts the money is there, but I feel like private-funding might not be an option for those doing research that doesn't align with the funder's interests.

1 http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/trumps-first-budget-analysis-and-reaction

Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
2. Mar 22, 2017

### Greg Bernhardt

Business idea, kickstarter for science research?

3. Mar 23, 2017

### John Morrell

I don't think that's likely; the sheer scale of the funds required is beyond what crowdsourcing could really provide, and often there is no real predictable monetary benefit.

"NOVEL USE OF POTASSIUM NITRATE FOR MRI IMAGING:
Novel research in the use of potassium nitrate as a contrast agent in MRI for the detection of breast cancer.

$150 pledged of$3,560,000 goal

2 Backers

Support?"

would you?

4. Mar 23, 2017

### Andy Resnick

My research is dependent on external funding, and competition for funding has steadily gotten more difficult over time. I know lots of people who are in more precarious positions than I- soft-money 'research faculty' positions for example. Private funding (either through non-profits or for-profits) cannot replace federal funding- insufficient funds. In addition to submitting more collaborative proposals (to increase the 'relevance'), I expect to submit more proposals for research funding to other government agencies, typically military agencies.

5. Mar 24, 2017

### StatGuy2000

From what I've read, at least some of the cuts in NIH funding and other similar cuts in federal funding for scientific research will be redirected toward military/defense spending. Would the increase in the military or defense budget lead to more money available for the military to fund scientific research? (I know, it sounds circular, but then again I wonder if there is much logic involved in terms of decisions made regarding government budgets).

6. Mar 27, 2017

### Andy Resnick

It's unclear. In any case, the different agencies have different goals for funded projects. To be sure, 'grantsmanship' comes into play when translating (say) and NIH proposal into (say) an Army proposal, but the Army and NIH have very different goals and evaluation procedures.

7. Mar 27, 2017

### StatGuy2000

Hi everyone. I also wanted to ask a separate question that is related to this thread. Would any of you on PF think that the proposed cuts to publicly funded research at the NIH (and possibly other agencies) may lead to an "exodus" of scientists leaving the US for other nations (e.g. Canada)?

Does anyone on PF based in the US know of people who have seriously considered, are planning, or have actually moved out of the US due to the potential funding climate that scientists may possibly face?