Just a few examples:

The following are excerpts from major newspapers collected by
kaisernetwork . see www.kaisernetwork.org

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=15378

Federal Budget Deficit May Prevent NIH From Receiving Expected Increase
in Funding

".... Bush, scheduled to unveil his FY 2004 budget proposal on Feb. 3,
plans to request less than a 1% increase for the NIH budget, a "sharp
turnaround" from the annual 15% increases that the agency has received in
the past few years, the Journal reports.  The expected budget request
raises concerns from patient and research advocates, who maintain that
the agency should receive larger budget increases for research into
biomedical advances (McGinley, Wall Street Journal, 1/2).  Advocates said
that NIH must receive budget increases of at least 8% to 10% per year to
"capitalize on the progress being made in biomedical research," the
Journal reports.  Patient advocates plan to meet later this week to
develop a campaign to lobby Congress to approve the FY 2003 request,
which would complete a five-year proposal to double the NIH budget, and
approve a "sizable funding increase" for FY 2004, the Journal reports.
Myrl Weinberg, president of the National Health Council, said, "We find
it almost inconceivable that there could be this commitment by the
administration and Congress to double the budget and then have these
devastating cutbacks."  "

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=15341

Patient Advocates Criticize Makeup of HHS Human Research Advisory Panel

"       HHS on Jan. 3 named the 11 members of an advisory committee that will
make recommendations to HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson on the protection of
human research subjects, Washington Post reports.  HHS established the
Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections last fall
after several human research subjects suffered injuries in U.S. clinical
trials.  Thompson said, "We must make sure that we allow science and
medical research to advance for the good of all Americans, but not at the
expense of the people who participate in these clinical trials" (Weiss,
Washington Post, 1/5).  The new committee will replace the National Human
Research Protections Advisory Committee, which expired last September.
The committee charter, drafted last October, states that members "will
provide advice relating to the responsible conduct of research involving
human subjects with particular emphasis on ... pregnant women, embryos
and fetuses," a provision that led to some controversy (Weiss, Washington
Post, 10/30/02).

 The announcement of the committee membership raised concerns from
patient advocates because most of the members represent research
facilities with "financial stakes in human experiments" and none are
patient advocates.  Abbey Myers, president of the National Organization
for Rare Disorders and a patient advocate, said, "Without consumer
advocates, there's no one there to remind them that the purpose of human
research protections is to protect humans, not to protect university
research institutions."  The "scuffle" over the committee membership
marks the latest in a "series of accusations that the Bush administration
is systematically revamping its scientific advisory committees to
accomplish political goals," the Post reports.
 (Washington Post, 1/5).

and:
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=15258
ADMINISTRATION NEWS

Los Angeles Times Examines Dispute Over Makeup of Federal Scientific
Advisory Boards

"       The Los Angeles Times on Dec. 23 looks at increasing criticism from
researchers who say that the Bush administration is conducting "political
and ideological screening" of candidates to federal scientific advisory
panels to make sure they "recommend no policies that are out of step with
the political agenda of the White House."  For example, the FDA on Dec.
10 rejected an advisory board nominee who supports cloning for medical
research.  In addition, the staff of HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson
recently rejected a nominee to a research grant review panel of the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health who supports
federal rules to decrease repetitive stress injuries in the workplace.
Critics say the Bush administration is "going further than its
predecessors in considering ideology as well as scientific expertise" in
composing the panels, the Times reports.  Officials, however, say their
actions are consistent with those of previous administrations, adding
that they are "using appointment powers to make sure their viewpoints are
well-represented on the government's scientific advisory boards,"
according to the Times (Zitner, Los Angeles Times, 12/23).


----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn