Email today: “Funding for Project [xxx] is hereby terminated… The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities…"

[outside shooter]

I lead a research team studying /finding new antiviral drugs (NOT vaccines) for any and all viruses of pandemic potential. Not just COVID-19, but Ebola, Zika, Lassa fever, Dengue, Machupo viruses, and others.

But I guess we are shutting it all down. Someone (DOGE?) has determined that no more antiviral outbreaks will ever occur in the future!

Email this morning: “Funding for Project Number [xxx] is hereby terminated… The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities…"

"The end of the pandemic provides cause to terminate COVID-related grant funds. These grant funds were issued for a limited purpose: to ameliorate the effects of the pandemic. Now that the pandemic is over, the grant funds are no longer necessary… no corrective action is possible here."

"The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities, and no modification of the project could align the project with agency priorities. Costs resulting from financial obligations incurred after termination are not allowable”.


---
To be clear, this is not a COVID-19-specific grant. It targets many other viruses. With respect to COVID-19, our main focus is targeting ALL coronaviruses; SARS1, MERS, SARS2, etc so we have something for any future "COVID-XY" by blocking machinery common to all coronaviruses.

But we are apparently throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It seems I need to lay off people ASAP. Graduate students, postdocs, staff scientists....

 

[BCCHoosier]

I lead a research team studying /finding new antiviral drugs (NOT vaccines) for any and all viruses of pandemic potential. Not just COVID-19, but Ebola, Zika, Lassa fever, Dengue, Machupo viruses, and others.

But I guess we are shutting it all down. Someone (DOGE?) has determined that no more antiviral outbreaks will ever occur in the future!

Email this morning: “Funding for Project Number [xxx] is hereby terminated… The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities…"

"The end of the pandemic provides cause to terminate COVID-related grant funds. These grant funds were issued for a limited purpose: to ameliorate the effects of the pandemic. Now that the pandemic is over, the grant funds are no longer necessary… no corrective action is possible here."

"The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities, and no modification of the project could align the project with agency priorities. Costs resulting from financial obligations incurred after termination are not allowable”.


---
To be clear, this is not a COVID-19-specific grant. It targets many other viruses. With respect to COVID-19, our main focus is targeting ALL coronaviruses; SARS1, MERS, SARS2, etc so we have something for any future "COVID-XY" by blocking machinery common to all coronaviruses.

But we are apparently throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It seems I need to lay off people ASAP. Graduate students, postdocs, staff scientists....

Googly, the fact you live this tells people all they need to know about you. It's happening in cancer research as well. Karma coming your way Googly.

 

[UncleMark]

Googly, the fact you live this tells people all they need to know about you. It's happening in cancer research as well. Karma coming your way Googly.

In the long run, this will cost lives.

 

[snarlcakes]

I lead a research team studying /finding new antiviral drugs (NOT vaccines) for any and all viruses of pandemic potential. Not just COVID-19, but Ebola, Zika, Lassa fever, Dengue, Machupo viruses, and others.

But I guess we are shutting it all down. Someone (DOGE?) has determined that no more antiviral outbreaks will ever occur in the future!

Email this morning: “Funding for Project Number [xxx] is hereby terminated… The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities…"

"The end of the pandemic provides cause to terminate COVID-related grant funds. These grant funds were issued for a limited purpose: to ameliorate the effects of the pandemic. Now that the pandemic is over, the grant funds are no longer necessary… no corrective action is possible here."

"The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities, and no modification of the project could align the project with agency priorities. Costs resulting from financial obligations incurred after termination are not allowable”.


---
To be clear, this is not a COVID-19-specific grant. It targets many other viruses. With respect to COVID-19, our main focus is targeting ALL coronaviruses; SARS1, MERS, SARS2, etc so we have something for any future "COVID-XY" by blocking machinery common to all coronaviruses.

But we are apparently throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It seems I need to lay off people ASAP. Graduate students, postdocs, staff scientists....

Any government funding going to you or your team needs to be cut immediately. I do wish you all the success in raising private funds for your adventures.

 

[hoot1]

I lead a research team studying /finding new antiviral drugs (NOT vaccines) for any and all viruses of pandemic potential. Not just COVID-19, but Ebola, Zika, Lassa fever, Dengue, Machupo viruses, and others.

But I guess we are shutting it all down. Someone (DOGE?) has determined that no more antiviral outbreaks will ever occur in the future!

Email this morning: “Funding for Project Number [xxx] is hereby terminated… The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities…"

"The end of the pandemic provides cause to terminate COVID-related grant funds. These grant funds were issued for a limited purpose: to ameliorate the effects of the pandemic. Now that the pandemic is over, the grant funds are no longer necessary… no corrective action is possible here."

"The premise of this award is incompatible with agency priorities, and no modification of the project could align the project with agency priorities. Costs resulting from financial obligations incurred after termination are not allowable”.


---
To be clear, this is not a COVID-19-specific grant. It targets many other viruses. With respect to COVID-19, our main focus is targeting ALL coronaviruses; SARS1, MERS, SARS2, etc so we have something for any future "COVID-XY" by blocking machinery common to all coronaviruses.

But we are apparently throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It seems I need to lay off people ASAP. Graduate students, postdocs, staff scientists....

Shooter, you might consider keeping your "frivolous" opinions to yourself to avoid being terminated .

 

[Spartans9312]

In the long run, this will cost lives.

I don’t know anything about what shooter is posting because he is intentionally vague. Your statement could be attributed to a lot of things and frankly we have no idea what funding is cut and when and what it will be replaced with.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Any government funding going to you or your team needs to be cut immediately. I do wish you all the success in raising private funds for your adventures.

Let Pfizer pay

 

[hoot1]

I don’t know anything about what shooter is posting because he is intentionally vague. Your statement could be attributed to a lot of things and frankly we have no idea what funding is cut and when and what it will be replaced with.

Always thought when it came to funding, Congress was in charge.

Silly me.

 

[The Original Happy Goat]

I don’t know anything about what shooter is posting because he is intentionally vague. Your statement could be attributed to a lot of things and frankly we have no idea what funding is cut and when and what it will be replaced with.

Seems pretty obvious to me. After COVID, money was appropriated for grants related to viral pandemics, and those projects have applications beyond the single pandemic that gave rise to the funding. Shooter is in charge of one of those projects. The new administration has decided that any research funded as a result of COVID should be halted, since the pandemic is over. So now his project is cut off.

Since it's a virtual mathematical guarantee that any successful research into antiviral drugs is likely to save at least some lives in the future, Mark's comment seems most probably accurate.

 

[Spartans9312]

Always thought when it came to funding, Congress was in charge.

Silly me.

What are we funding?

 

[Spartans9312]

Seems pretty obvious to me. After COVID, money was appropriated for grants related to viral pandemics, and those projects have applications beyond the single pandemic that gave rise to the funding. Shooter is in charge of one of those projects. The new administration has decided that any research funded as a result of COVID should be halted, since the pandemic is over. So now his project is cut off.

Since it's a virtual mathematical guarantee that any successful research into antiviral drugs is likely to save at least some lives in the future, Mark's comment seems most probably accurate.

You have no clue, I have no clue, Mark has no clue. For all we know he’s studying ivermectin or the effects of a blood moon on frog reproduction rates.

 

[larsIU]

I bet the reserach into whether COVID vaccines caused heart conditions will continue though.

Let's see how it plays out.

 

[outside shooter]

I do wish you all the success in raising private funds for your adventures.

We will try.

One MAJOR problem is that pharma companies and venture capitalists will not develop a drug to merely have sitting on the shelf for some anticipated but not yet realized future outbreak. There simply would be no clinical trial to run, since there wouldn't be patients right now to try it on. There might not even be any until the patent runs out in 18 years. Financial reward is not guaranteed. Timelines are uncertain.

So... it is a type a research best suited to do in a University setting and funded by NIH.

Many many drugs on the market relied on underlying academic studies. Cut off such efforts, without thought, at your peril.

 

[The Original Happy Goat]

You have no clue, I have no clue, Mark has no clue. For all we know he’s studying ivermectin or the effects of a blood moon on frog reproduction rates.

He said it was antiviral drugs in the OP. I'm assuming he's telling the truth.

 

[BCCHoosier]

Let Pfizer pay

I know how you guys feel about Outside, but his response above is spot on. This is not the type of thing big pharma likes to spend time on, but it is important work nevertheless.

 

[mcmurtry66]

I know how you guys feel about Outside, but his response above is spot on. This is not the type of thing big pharma likes to spend time on, but it is important work nevertheless.

Then maybe big pharma shouldn’t get all of the protection and benefits they do.

And these universities with the endless bs post docs (let’s make up work) can find other funding. Limit what they research. Pare it down

There are ways. Adapt

 

[BCCHoosier]

You have no clue, I have no clue, Mark has no clue. For all we know he’s studying ivermectin or the effects of a blood moon on frog reproduction rates.

Why leap time the worst case scenario. Surely your stance is not that all research taking place is a waste?

 

[hoot1]

What are we funding?

Don't know the details of the contract which Shooter's employer was working under as written by the agency responsible for the spending as authorized and funded by Congress.

Can imagine Shooter's employer has invested their own funds and hired people expecting to be funded.

Chalk all the above up as idle chatter from a complete outsider.

 

[outside shooter]

I don’t know anything about what shooter is posting because he is intentionally vague.

Let me be unvague.

I am the director of all medicinal chemistry support for the Midwest AViDD Center, where AViDD stands for antiviral drug discovery. It began in 2022 as a collaboration of over 40 professors across many Universities and Research Institutes: U. Minnesota, U. Illinois-Chicago, UF Scripps Research, University of Florida, University of Louisville, UT San Antonio, Baylor College of Medicine, UC San Diego, UC Berkeley, Boston University, Boston Children's Hospital. I am a medicinal chemist with 15 years of pharma experience and 19 years of academic experience. IU PhD 1991.

The grant was funded in 2022 for 5 years, with the mandate to focus on entirely new areas of antivirals research, directed toward viruses identified as having "high pandemic potential" and with well-defined milestones to meet.

About a year ago we were told that years 4 and 5 were defunded. Our course of action was to save funds and focus on only the projects with the very best preliminary results, leaving money "left over" to continue the work into a 4th year, a request called a "no cost extension" or "NCE".

Last week we learned that the NCE might not be considered or awarded. So money already allocated, that we did not spend because we were frugal, was taken away with no justification.

Now we are told with no advance notice that funding ends today. Fire everybody.

The notice was not written by NIH officials, since it was riddled with scientific errors. It was written by DOGE or other Trump lackeys and the NIH officer was ordered to send it out.

Does this help?

 

[BCCHoosier]

Then maybe big pharma shouldn’t get all of the protection and benefits they do.

And these universities with the endless bs post docs can find other funding. Limit what they research.

There are ways. Adapt

That is your conclusion to this? Do you just like to argue some days? You do not have the be contrarian on everything. It's ok to tell Outside that it sucks his funding was cut and that hopefully it does not cost lives.

My niece dealing with this same thing on a cancer research project at a Big 10 University.

 

[outside shooter]

Cancer research is another story. It's being flagged as "woke" since a new cancer drug likely disproportionately benefits people in groups with higher rates of cancer mortality. That includes some non-whites. Can't have that woke shit going on.

 

[mcmurtry66]

That is your conclusion to this? Do you just like to argue some days? You do not have the be contrarian on everything. It's ok to tell Outside that it sucks his funding was cut and that hopefully it does not cost lives.

My niece dealing with this same thing on a cancer research project at a Big 10 University.

Too fcking bad they don’t like to spend. High pandemic potential. As a result of Covid Pfizer had record revenue. They’re also insulated from liability. So now people are seeing side effects that aren’t just long Covid. And there’s a piss ant fund that is the only recourse. So no I’m not being contrarian. Figure out other ways to fund.

Pfizer you’re worried about risk. Okay contribute more to funding or lose protection. Universities we’re revisiting endowments. Taxing etc. And we’re cutting social bullshit research on gender studies and paring down limited monies to earmark for crucial research.

There are ways. You just have to get out of the this is how we always do it mindset.

 

[Spartans9312]

Let me be unvague.

I am the director of all medicinal chemistry support for the Midwest AViDD Center, where AViDD stands for antiviral drug discovery. It began in 2022 as a collaboration of over 40 professors across many Universities and Research Institutes: U. Minnesota, U. Illinois-Chicago, UF Scripps Research, University of Florida, University of Louisville, UT San Antonio, Baylor College of Medicine, UC San Diego, UC Berkeley, Boston University, Boston Children's Hospital. I am a medicinal chemist with 15 years of pharma experience and 19 years of academic experience. IU PhD 1991.

The grant was funded in 2022 for 5 years, with the mandate to focus on entirely new areas of antivirals research, directed toward viruses identified as having "high pandemic potential" and with well-defined milestones to meet.

About a year ago we were told that years 4 and 5 were defunded. Our course of action was to save funds and focus on only the projects with the very best preliminary results, leaving money "left over" to continue the work into a 4th year, a request called a "no cost extension" or "NCE".

Last week we learned that the NCE might not be considered or awarded. So money already allocated, that we did not spend because we were frugal, was taken away with no justification.

Now we are told with no advance notice that funding ends today. Fire everybody.

The notice was not written by NIH officials, since it was riddled with scientific errors. It was written by DOGE or other Trump lackeys and the NIH officer was ordered to send it out.

Does this help?

What happens with the research materials?

 

[mcmurtry66]

That is your conclusion to this? Do you just like to argue some days? You do not have the be contrarian on everything. It's ok to tell Outside that it sucks his funding was cut and that hopefully it does not cost lives.

My niece dealing with this same thing on a cancer research project at a Big 10 University.

40 professors. Insane number of universities. Maybe that can be consolidated. Maybe there’s infrastructure ways. Redundancies that can be eliminated.

We are 35 trillion in debt but the second you start cutting oh no not that. These schools administration costs alone are a joke

 

[larsIU]

hen maybe big pharma shouldn’t get all of the protection and benefits they do.

And these universities with the endless bs post docs (let’s make up work) can find other funding. Limit what they research. Pare it down

There are ways. Adapt

Have you ever wondered why American universities are the best and most desirable in the world. And the benefit we as a country get from the discoveries funded by our government as opposed to those funded (and then invariably kept secret) by the pharma companies? Additionally, and @outside shooter can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

 

[mcmurtry66]

Have you ever wondered why American universities are the best and most desirable in the world. And the benefit we as a country get from the discoveries funded by our government as opposed to those funded (and then invariably kept secret) by the pharma companies? Additionally, and @outside shooter can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

And I’m all for it. Reimagine how it’s funded. Think outside of the box. Raze the building for phd’s in public admin gender studies and a hundred other things and save the the tuition waivers and stipends and reallocate it to cancer. Pandemics. Make law school 2 years and the third you work. Cut faculty

 

[DANC]

That is your conclusion to this? Do you just like to argue some days? You do not have the be contrarian on everything. It's ok to tell Outside that it sucks his funding was cut and that hopefully it does not cost lives.

My niece dealing with this same thing on a cancer research project at a Big 10 University.

$37 trillion in debt. It would be nice if we could keep funding everything, but hard choices have to be made or we'll be carrying money around in a wheelbarrow soon.

 

[outside shooter]

Pfizer is not insulated from any liability whatsoever in the sale of its antiviral Paxlovid.

The PREP ACT did establish free access by emergency use authorization and gave limited liability for COVID-19 drugs, vaccines, and tests. But once such treatments moved away from being distributed under the EUA agreement and they transitioned to traditional pathways for procurement, distribution, and payment, PREP Act coverage terminated.

There is some limited liability coverage remaining for vaccines, to incentivize companies to do research in a highly litigious area. It provides no protection for fraud or data falsification.

There is limited liability for women's health drugs as well, for example. There has to be, if you think about it.

One famous story was in the 1970s a company developed a drug called Bendectin that was super effective in curbing morning sickness in pregnant women. It was safe in clinical trials, but it didn't PREVENT certain adverse events, such as birth defects. So 12 different women among many thousands taking it had a child with a birth defect, the same rate of birth defects seen in women NOT taking it. But each of them sued anyway. Each of them lost in court because the safety data was clear. But it expensive to even WIN court cases, and the publicity is awful. So the drug was pulled, the company said they would no longer work in women's health, a dozen other companies made the same declaration, and then the FDA said wait a minute, women's health is important. Don't abandon it. We will limit liability through an act of Congress.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Have you ever wondered why American universities are the best and most desirable in the world. And the benefit we as a country get from the discoveries funded by our government as opposed to those funded (and then invariably kept secret) by the pharma companies? Additionally, and @outside shooter can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

Have you ever wondered why American universities are the best and most desirable in the world. And the benefit we as a country get from the discoveries funded by our government as opposed to those funded (and then invariably kept secret) by the pharma companies? Additionally, and @outside shooter can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

Have you ever dealt with universities on research. I’ve been dealing with five for almost ten years. Slowest mother fckrs on the planet. Get their grants and move at 0 mph. No urgency at all. Even less business acumen. They get a percentage of our sales abd every time we need something tested they could do in an hour on their own they create a contract and hire three grad students to give them something to do

 

[Spartans9312]

Have you ever wondered why American universities are the best and most desirable in the world. And the benefit we as a country get from the discoveries funded by our government as opposed to those funded (and then invariably kept secret) by the pharma companies? Additionally, and @outside shooter can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

Where was shooters outrage when years 4 and 5 were defunded a year ago?

What time period did the last CR cover?

Were the funds allocated by Congress and are they subject to impoundment past 90 days?

Murt has a point…any time something is cut someone throws a bitch fit…Congress needs to get their head out of their ass.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Pfizer is not insulated from any liability whatsoever in the sale of its antiviral Paxlovid.

The PREP ACT did establish free access by emergency use authorization and gave limited liability for COVID-19 drugs, vaccines, and tests. But once such treatments moved away from being distributed under the EUA agreement and they transitioned to traditional pathways for procurement, distribution, and payment, PREP Act coverage terminated.

There is some limited liability coverage remaining for vaccines, to incentivize companies to do research in a highly litigious area. It provides no protection for fraud or data falsification.

There is limited liability for women's health drugs as well, for example. There has to be, if you think about it.

One famous story was in the 1970s a company developed a drug called Bendectin that was super effective in curbing morning sickness in pregnant women. It was safe in clinical trials, but it didn't PREVENT certain adverse events, such as birth defects. So 12 different women among many thousands taking it had a child with a birth defect, the same rate of birth defects seen in women NOT taking it. But each of them sued anyway. Each of them lost in court because the safety data was clear. But it expensive to even WIN court cases, and the publicity is awful. So the drug was pulled, the company said they would no longer work in women's health, a dozen other companies made the same declaration, and then the FDA said wait a minute, women's health is important. Don't abandon it. We will limit liability through an act of Congress.

The Covid vaccines run through the cicp. It’s a joke. Most other vaccines go through the vicp. They’re an alternative to the tort system. No fault. Fraud and falsification aren’t the germane issue. It’s negligence

Pfizer cleaned up with Covid

 

[outside shooter]

there are multiple institutions working on a program they share data/results/findings back and forth as part of pushlishing, no?

Every grant application requires a detailed data sharing plan. You are given some time to file patents (without which nothing would come of the research) but after that grace period you MUST make publicly available all data and publish results in peer-reviewed journals. Unlike pharma you cannot keep "trade secrets". It makes academic research especially foundational. It seeds other discoveries. The first drug in a class doesn't usually turn out to be the best / safest / most effective. But without it, nobody gets to the best / safest / most effective drug.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

40 professors. Insane number of universities. Maybe that can be consolidated. Maybe there’s infrastructure ways. Redundancies that can be eliminated.

We are 35 trillion in debt but the second you start cutting oh no not that. These schools administration costs alone are a joke

40 professors, I doubt they are all working full-time on it. Rather, they have pieces.

I don't know if this is worth investing in, I doubt you know. Shooter has an idea, but it is his project so I wouldn't expect it to be totally unbiased. But yes, generally speaking, preparing for all these various possible contagions is a good idea. Pharma isn't about to put millions (or more) into something they don't know will ever develop.

Let's move it from shooter to NASA; should we fund the efforts to nudge asteroids away from Earth? We don't know when the next one will threaten us, it might be a thousand years from now. We also might have one in 5 years. Should we fund it, or should we say it isn't worth the risk, and if one does come in 5 years we can just kiss our As goodbye?

Or there is research in new antibiotics. Since we don't take them every day, it is far more profitable to treat things like erectile dysfunction. There's a pill you take daily for life, boom, profit. A course of antibiotics one takes 10 times and then won't need it for 10 more years, not a lot of money. Should the government fund antibiotic research? If they don't, who does? If no one does, we will get back to a point where people will routinely die from a scraped knee. Is that what we want? The article below is 6 years old, so 8 years ago 2 million Americans had antimicrobial-resistant infections. The most recent I see is 2019 at 2.8 million.

The drugs don’t work: what happens after antibiotics?

Antibiotic resistance is growing so fast that routine surgery could soon become impossible. But scientists are fighting back in the battle against infection. By Oliver Franklin-Wallis

www.theguardian.com

I don't have an answer, but if we are cutting medical research that is serious research (cancer and future pandemics are serious), is there any triage being done in cutting, or is it just cut everything for the hell of it?

 

[mcmurtry66]

That is your conclusion to this? Do you just like to argue some days? You do not have the be contrarian on everything. It's ok to tell Outside that it sucks his funding was cut and that hopefully it does not cost lives.

My niece dealing with this same thing on a cancer research project at a Big 10 University.

No one is here to be contrarian. You put me Spartans googly DANC in a thread you have to know we’re gonna bring it

 

[Spartans9312]

The Covid vaccines run through the cicp. It’s a joke. Most other vaccines go through the vicp. They’re an alternative to the tort system. Fraud and falsification aren’t the germane issue. It’s negligence

Pfizer cleaned up with Covid

I wonder what their reimbursement rate was for paxlovid? You could not charge people for the drug. They weren’t giving it away.

 

[Spartans9312]

40 professors, I doubt they are all working full-time on it. Rather, they have pieces.

I don't know if this is worth investing in, I doubt you know. Shooter has an idea, but it is his project so I wouldn't expect it to be totally unbiased. But yes, generally speaking, preparing for all these various possible contagions is a good idea. Pharma isn't about to put millions (or more) into something they don't know will ever develop.

Let's move it from shooter to NASA; should we fund the efforts to nudge asteroids away from Earth? We don't know when the next one will threaten us, it might be a thousand years from now. We also might have one in 5 years. Should we fund it, or should we say it isn't worth the risk, and if one does come in 5 years we can just kiss our As goodbye?

Or there is research in new antibiotics. Since we don't take them every day, it is far more profitable to treat things like erectile dysfunction. There's a pill you take daily for life, boom, profit. A course of antibiotics one takes 10 times and then won't need it for 10 more years, not a lot of money. Should the government fund antibiotic research? If they don't, who does? If no one does, we will get back to a point where people will routinely die from a scraped knee. Is that what we want? The article below is 6 years old, so 8 years ago 2 million Americans had antimicrobial-resistant infections. The most recent I see is 2019 at 2.8 million.

The drugs don’t work: what happens after antibiotics?

Antibiotic resistance is growing so fast that routine surgery could soon become impossible. But scientists are fighting back in the battle against infection. By Oliver Franklin-Wallis

www.theguardian.com

I don't have an answer, but if we are cutting medical research that is serious research (cancer and future pandemics are serious), is there any triage being done in cutting, or is it just cut everything for the hell of it?

My question…are we really funding it or are we taking out a loan?

 

[mcmurtry66]

40 professors, I doubt they are all working full-time on it. Rather, they have pieces.

I don't know if this is worth investing in, I doubt you know. Shooter has an idea, but it is his project so I wouldn't expect it to be totally unbiased. But yes, generally speaking, preparing for all these various possible contagions is a good idea. Pharma isn't about to put millions (or more) into something they don't know will ever develop.

Let's move it from shooter to NASA; should we fund the efforts to nudge asteroids away from Earth? We don't know when the next one will threaten us, it might be a thousand years from now. We also might have one in 5 years. Should we fund it, or should we say it isn't worth the risk, and if one does come in 5 years we can just kiss our As goodbye?

Or there is research in new antibiotics. Since we don't take them every day, it is far more profitable to treat things like erectile dysfunction. There's a pill you take daily for life, boom, profit. A course of antibiotics one takes 10 times and then won't need it for 10 more years, not a lot of money. Should the government fund antibiotic research? If they don't, who does? If no one does, we will get back to a point where people will routinely die from a scraped knee. Is that what we want? The article below is 6 years old, so 8 years ago 2 million Americans had antimicrobial-resistant infections. The most recent I see is 2019 at 2.8 million.

The drugs don’t work: what happens after antibiotics?

Antibiotic resistance is growing so fast that routine surgery could soon become impossible. But scientists are fighting back in the battle against infection. By Oliver Franklin-Wallis

www.theguardian.com

I don't have an answer, but if we are cutting medical research that is serious research (cancer and future pandemics are serious), is there any triage being done in cutting, or is it just cut everything for the hell of it?

My guess is this administration is incredibly sloppy. They voiced two trillion which was a mistake and are clear cutting the lowest hanging fruit trees.

Your posts are discussions a competent congress comprised of competent people should be having. Not vapid squad members. Cori bush. Or self dealing self interested bought and paid for congressman. But how do we do that. With respect to topics if we backed out the dummies and lunatics on this board and just took the reasonable I suspect we would have very little trouble reaching a consensus on research areas that are necessary vs those that aren’t

 

[outside shooter]

40 professors, I doubt they are all working full-time on it. Rather, they have pieces.

Different professors and different sites have different expertise, and we do allocate a certain number of "calendar months" or percentage effort to each project.

The size was questioned. But... say you need someone to work with live SARS-CoV-2. You need a "space suit" biohazard safety level 3/4 facility and there are damn few of those. U. Louisville has one. You want to study Lassa virus? Include one of the foremost Lassa virus virologists. You want to study Zika virus? Include one of the foremost Zika virus virologists, at a different place. You want to study Ebola virus? Include one of the foremost Ebola virus virologists, at a different place. You want to use AI in drug design? Enlist a top AI team. You get the best and brightest and you are never at one place, and if you think you are, you're fooling yourself.

 

[outside shooter]

Where was shooters outrage when years 4 and 5 were defunded a year ago?

I didn't express it here, but outrage was mitigated by the fact that there were appropriations bills immediately written in both the house and senate, with bipartisan support, to restore at least part of the funding. 80 million dollars, to be specific. 1/25th the cost of one B2 bomber.

Also, as I said, we started cost-cutting to stretch 3 years of funding into 4. Now that frugality is being kneecapped.

The reliance on the CR rather than actually formulating a budget means that the appropriations bills written in both the house and senate will not be discussed.

 

[mattndallas]

If you're the baby getting thrown out with the bathwater...don't be pissed at the one dumping the tub.

Focus your anger on the ones that shit in the bathwater in the first place, as a strategy to tank the economy and unseat "Orange Man Bad".