NIH Spending in 2017: the Good and the Bad of It

[Cort]

The good news - NIH spending on ME/CFS went up dramatically in 2017. The bad news - the area of spending that we most need - individual researcher funding - actually went down. Jennie Spotila does a great job in breaking it down in her latest post.

We REALLY need individual investigators to step up and apply for grants. That's where the NIH spends most of its money....

While problems exist, an analysis I did indicated that grant acceptance rates are not lower for ME/CFS as a whole - the main problem is that researchers are not applying for grants.

http://occupyme.net/2018/03/20/2017-nih-spending-on-mecfs-research/

 

[Paw]

And for 2018... Luckily we have a president with no attention to detail, so he surely didn't realize Congress was ignoring his plan to cut NIH by 18%. Nature.com has a nice summary of how well science will fare this year. They warn, though, that the good news could be temporary, seeing as Trump and his Fox followers wound up hating the spending bill because it didn't cut enough.

But, for now, thanks mostly to savvy Dems, NIH's budget will remain at a record high, the National Science Foundation is receiving a bit more, and the EPA was spared the truly massive cuts Trump has been promising. Give Congress back to responsible Dems if you want to forestall the promised sell-off to the military, corporate profiteers, and Trump's disgusting vanity wall.

 

[Cort]

Yes, good point - NIH gets another 3 billion dollar increase - nice. Trump's budget goes essentially nowhere.