 |
 |
In a message dated 98-10-28 22:29:38 EST, you write: >Most disturbing, the study showed that 38% of the research was "non-related," >or unlikely to have direct >or residual benefit in finding the cause, pathogenesis and/or potential >therapies or treatments for >Parkinson's disease. > > Dear Michael, Is there a way we can reduce the amount of "non-related" research being done on Parkinson's Disease by NIH? Should we lean on our congressmen and senators? Lean on NIH? Attempt to get news coverage pointing out NIH's less- than-total commitment to Parkinson's? None of the above. It is very frustrating to work so hard to get the Udall Act passed, then have to work hard to get it funded, only to find that the funding is not used as all of us intended. I would welcome your suggestions. Delda White CG Bob 66/2