 |
 |
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