This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--part0_884272855_boundary
Content-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Thought that if all of you haven't yet seen this article, that you might find
it interesting.
Bill Turenne, Jr.
>
> Publication: Seattle Post-Intelligencer
> Date: Jan 3, 1998
> Author: ROBERT PEAR THE NEW YORK TIMES
> Words: 984
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IN LINE FOR CASH BOOST
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In his new budget, President Clinton plans to seek a substantial
> increase in federal spending on biomedical research, and members of
> Congress from both parties say they are virtually certain to approve
> an even bigger increase.
>
>
>
> Science and politics point to the
> same conclusion. When Congress reconvenes this month, lawmakers will
> be seeking more money for the National Institutes of Health because
> they believe that researchers can exploit promising scientific
> opportunities such as new advances in cancer treatment. They also
> believe that such investments will be popular with voters in an
> election year.
>
>
>
> "We are in a golden age of discovery, one
> unique in human history," said Dr. Richard Klausner, director of the
> National Cancer Institute, expressing the view of many scientists and
> lawmakers.
>
>
>
> Even before Clinton formally sends his budget
> request to Capitol Hill early next month, NIH officials have told
> Congress that the federal government must increase its support of
> biomedical research because managed-care companies, with their
> emphasis on the bottom line, have reduced the amount of money
> available to conduct clinical trials of promising treatments. In the
> past, academic health centers used surplus revenues from patient care
> to supplement the money they received from the government, but such
> surpluses are drying up.
>
>
>
> The budget of the health institutes
> has doubled in the last decade, to $13.6 billion this year.
> Nonetheless, lawmakers of both parties say they intend to accelerate
> the increases, and they talk seriously about trying to double the
> budget of the NIH in five years. That would require annual increases
> averaging 15 percent, far more than the latest increase of 7.1
> percent, from 1997 to 1998.
>
>
>
> Anne Thomas, a spokeswoman for
> the National Institutes of Health, said NIH officials had begun
> internal discussions so they could answer questions from Congress
> about how they would use a big infusion of federal money. In setting
> priorities, Thomas said, the agency's director, Dr. Harold Varmus,
> is asking, "Where are the scientific opportunities, and what are the
> public health needs?"
>
>
>
> The Senate voted 98-0 last year to
> endorse the goal of doubling the agency's budget in five years, but
> did not say where the money should come from.
>
>
>
> Two influential
> Republicans, Rep. John Edward Porter of Illinois and Sen. Arlen
> Specter of Pennsylvania, said they were determined to find the money.
> They are chairmen of the Appropriations subcommittees responsible for
> health care spending.
>
>
>
> In an interview, Porter said that he
> had discussed the question at length with Speaker Newt Gingrich, and
> that Gingrich "supports doubling the NIH budget in five years, within
> the overall context of a balanced budget." At a forum on health
> issues in Smyrna, Ga., in November, Gingrich said he wanted to double
> spending on biological research.
>
>
>
> Porter said Clinton had
> sought rather modest increases for the health institutes in recent
> years, knowing that Congress would provide more money than he
> requested. "That is not honest budgeting," Porter said.
>
>
>
>
> Republican senators, including Connie Mack of Florida and Alfonse
> D'Amato of New York, said they would join Democratic senators such as
> Tom Harkin of Iowa and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts in seeking big
> budget increases for the health institutes.
>
>
>
> Some Republicans
> were skeptical about such spending after they took control of
> Congress in 1995, but they have since been persuaded that biomedical
> research is an engine of economic growth, with many commercial uses
> for biotechnology, agriculture and the drug industry.
>
>
>
> Kennedy
> has proposed using money from new tobacco taxes to finance medical
> research, an idea that seems to be gaining favor on Capitol Hill.
>
>
>
>
> In a recent interview with The New York Times, Clinton sounded a
> theme that White House officials said would show up in his State of
> the Union Message late this month. "I do believe that in scientific
> terms, the last 50 years will be seen as an age of physics and an age
> of space exploration," Clinton said. "I think the next 50 years will
> very likely be characterized predominantly as an age of biology and
> the exploration of the human organism, especially with the completion
> of the human genome project, which I think will literally explode
> what we know about how to deal with health issues."
>
>
>
> A major
> goal of the genome project is to understand and decipher the human
> genetic code, identifying genes responsible for particular diseases.
>
>
>
>
> Patients' groups concerned about specific diseases, doctors
> and medical schools are forming a coalition to lobby for a 100
> percent increase in the institutes' budget over the next five years.
> Terry Lierman, president of Capitol Associates, a lobbying concern,
> said yesterday: "We plan a grass-roots campaign inside and outside
> the Beltway. It will be run the same way Northrop Grumman lobbies for
> the B-2 bomber."
>
>
>
> Members of Congress said they would look to
> NIH officials, rather than to the White House, for guidance as they
> decide this year on the appropriate level of spending for biomedical
> research. Klausner, the director of the National Cancer Institute,
> recently sent Congress a blueprint for spending $3.19 billion in the
> next fiscal year, up from the $2.55 billion provided to the cancer
> institute this year.
>
>
>
> "Knowledge about the fundamental nature
> of cancer is exploding," Klausner said.
>
>
>
> The budget request,
> reflecting the professional judgment of government scientists,
> includes these proposals:
>
>
>
> -- The number of cancer research
> and treatment centers around the country should be increased to 70,
> from 57.
>
>
>
> -- The government should authorize "a fivefold
> increase over the next five years in the number of people
> participating" in clinical trials of new techniques for the
> prevention and treatment of cancer. At present, 300,000 people
> participate in such studies.
>
>
>
> -- Congress should provide an
> additional sum of $40 million next year so the government can finance
> the top 40 percent of applications for research. The cancer institute
> says it now awards grants to the top 25 percent. (Applications are
> evaluated by panels of experts, through a competitive process of peer
> review.)
>
>
>
> (Copyright 1998)
>
>
>
>
> Copyright 1997 Scoop, Inc. Duplication and distribution restricted.
> Article No. SEPI80040082
--part0_884272855_boundary
Content-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type: message/rfc822
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from relay09.mail.aol.com (relay09.mail.aol.com [172.31.109.9]) by
air11.mail.aol.com (v37.8) with SMTP; Wed, 07 Jan 1998 17:04:25 -0500
Received: from risa.scoopnews.com (risa.scoop.com [208.158.100.253])
by relay09.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id RAA12748 for <[log in to unmask]>;
Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:03:05 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 17:03:05 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from [208.158.97.11] by risa.scoopnews.com (Post.Office MTA v3.1
release PO203a ID# 0-37094U100L100S0) with SMTP id AAA268
for <[log in to unmask]>; Wed, 7 Jan 1998 13:44:00 -0800
From: Lawrence Hoffheimer <[log in to unmask]>
X-Scoop-Customer: 7913
X-Scoop-Record: SEPI80040082
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FWD: BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IN LINE FOR CASH BOOST
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
This Scoop! Direct article was forwarded by Lawrence Hoffheimer.
Bill:
Please print this and fax it to the
steering committee, etc.
Larry
Publication: Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Date: Jan 3, 1998
Author: ROBERT PEAR THE NEW YORK TIMES
Words: 984
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH IN LINE FOR CASH BOOST
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In his new budget, President Clinton plans to seek a substantial
increase in federal spending on biomedical research, and members of
Congress from both parties say they are virtually certain to approve
an even bigger increase.
Science and politics point to the
same conclusion. When Congress reconvenes this month, lawmakers will
be seeking more money for the National Institutes of Health because
they believe that researchers can exploit promising scientific
opportunities such as new advances in cancer treatment. They also
believe that such investments will be popular with voters in an
election year.
"We are in a golden age of discovery, one
unique in human history," said Dr. Richard Klausner, director of the
National Cancer Institute, expressing the view of many scientists and
lawmakers.
Even before Clinton formally sends his budget
request to Capitol Hill early next month, NIH officials have told
Congress that the federal government must increase its support of
biomedical research because managed-care companies, with their
emphasis on the bottom line, have reduced the amount of money
available to conduct clinical trials of promising treatments. In the
past, academic health centers used surplus revenues from patient care
to supplement the money they received from the government, but such
surpluses are drying up.
The budget of the health institutes
has doubled in the last decade, to $13.6 billion this year.
Nonetheless, lawmakers of both parties say they intend to accelerate
the increases, and they talk seriously about trying to double the
budget of the NIH in five years. That would require annual increases
averaging 15 percent, far more than the latest increase of 7.1
percent, from 1997 to 1998.
Anne Thomas, a spokeswoman for
the National Institutes of Health, said NIH officials had begun
internal discussions so they could answer questions from Congress
about how they would use a big infusion of federal money. In setting
priorities, Thomas said, the agency's director, Dr. Harold Varmus,
is asking, "Where are the scientific opportunities, and what are the
public health needs?"
The Senate voted 98-0 last year to
endorse the goal of doubling the agency's budget in five years, but
did not say where the money should come from.
Two influential
Republicans, Rep. John Edward Porter of Illinois and Sen. Arlen
Specter of Pennsylvania, said they were determined to find the money.
They are chairmen of the Appropriations subcommittees responsible for
health care spending.
In an interview, Porter said that he
had discussed the question at length with Speaker Newt Gingrich, and
that Gingrich "supports doubling the NIH budget in five years, within
the overall context of a balanced budget." At a forum on health
issues in Smyrna, Ga., in November, Gingrich said he wanted to double
spending on biological research.
Porter said Clinton had
sought rather modest increases for the health institutes in recent
years, knowing that Congress would provide more money than he
requested. "That is not honest budgeting," Porter said.
Republican senators, including Connie Mack of Florida and Alfonse
D'Amato of New York, said they would join Democratic senators such as
Tom Harkin of Iowa and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts in seeking big
budget increases for the health institutes.
Some Republicans
were skeptical about such spending after they took control of
Congress in 1995, but they have since been persuaded that biomedical
research is an engine of economic growth, with many commercial uses
for biotechnology, agriculture and the drug industry.
Kennedy
has proposed using money from new tobacco taxes to finance medical
research, an idea that seems to be gaining favor on Capitol Hill.
In a recent interview with The New York Times, Clinton sounded a
theme that White House officials said would show up in his State of
the Union Message late this month. "I do believe that in scientific
terms, the last 50 years will be seen as an age of physics and an age
of space exploration," Clinton said. "I think the next 50 years will
very likely be characterized predominantly as an age of biology and
the exploration of the human organism, especially with the completion
of the human genome project, which I think will literally explode
what we know about how to deal with health issues."
A major
goal of the genome project is to understand and decipher the human
genetic code, identifying genes responsible for particular diseases.
Patients' groups concerned about specific diseases, doctors
and medical schools are forming a coalition to lobby for a 100
percent increase in the institutes' budget over the next five years.
Terry Lierman, president of Capitol Associates, a lobbying concern,
said yesterday: "We plan a grass-roots campaign inside and outside
the Beltway. It will be run the same way Northrop Grumman lobbies for
the B-2 bomber."
Members of Congress said they would look to
NIH officials, rather than to the White House, for guidance as they
decide this year on the appropriate level of spending for biomedical
research. Klausner, the director of the National Cancer Institute,
recently sent Congress a blueprint for spending $3.19 billion in the
next fiscal year, up from the $2.55 billion provided to the cancer
institute this year.
"Knowledge about the fundamental nature
of cancer is exploding," Klausner said.
The budget request,
reflecting the professional judgment of government scientists,
includes these proposals:
-- The number of cancer research
and treatment centers around the country should be increased to 70,
from 57.
-- The government should authorize "a fivefold
increase over the next five years in the number of people
participating" in clinical trials of new techniques for the
prevention and treatment of cancer. At present, 300,000 people
participate in such studies.
-- Congress should provide an
additional sum of $40 million next year so the government can finance
the top 40 percent of applications for research. The cancer institute
says it now awards grants to the top 25 percent. (Applications are
evaluated by panels of experts, through a competitive process of peer
review.)
(Copyright 1998)
Copyright 1997 Scoop, Inc. Duplication and distribution restricted.
Article No. SEPI80040082
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Scoop! Direct is an web-based news and information service that
delivers personalized news from thousands of trusted newspapers, wire
services, magazines and trade publications and includes powerful
web-based research capabilities.
Register now and get Scoop! Direct
for just $29.95 per month with a 30-day, money-back guarantee.
http://www.scoopdirect.com
--part0_884272855_boundary--
