Print

Print


Hello,

Bruce Anderson raised the issue of how much research funding each
disease should receive.  In my opinion it should be based on what is
called the "disease burden," that is, the total of the personal and
societal economic costs with some kind of personal suffering index
factored in, which would include some indicator of how manageable
the disease is.  Regarding current funding inequities, a year or so
ago I created the following chart using the numbers most commonly
quoted at the time.  If you compare disease funding to disease cost,
you get something like this, keeping in mind that the prevalence and
cost numbers are rather approximate.  (m) and (b) stand for million
and billion.  (Note: columns will line up if you use courier font.)

                NIH Research Funding vs. Disease Costs

+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
|             | Approx |  Annual | Annual |   NIH   |  Rsch |  Rsch |
|             | Cases  | Economic| Cost/  | Research|   per |  as % |
| Disease     |  (m)   | Cost (b)|  Case  | 1998 (m)|  Case |  Cost |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Heart       |   56   |   128   |   2286 |   1155  |   21  |   .9  |
| Disease     |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Cancer      |   10   |   104   |  10400 |   2942  |  294  |  3.0  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Alzheimer's |    4   |   100   |  25000 |    349  |   87  |   .3  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Diabetes    |   16   |    92   |   5750 |    373  |   23  |   .4  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Arthritis   |   40   |    65   |   1625 |     ?   |    ?  |    ?  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Depression  |   17   |    44   |   2588 |     ?   |    ?  |    ?  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Stroke      |    3   |    30   |  10000 |    152  |   50  |   .5  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Osteo-      |   28   |    10   |    357 |    121  |    4  |  1.0  |
| porosis     |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+
| Parkinson's |    1   |    25   |  25000 |     98? |   98? |   .4  |
|             |        |         |        |         |       |       |
+-------------+--------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-------+

Since then I am told that 98 million for PD is way too high, as it is
based on NIH numbers that include non-PD research!

Regarding diabetes, which Bruce mentioned, I'd put it higher on the
misery index than PD.  It is the fourth leading cause of death, as
well as a cause of blindness and kidney failure.

Phil Tompkins
age 60/dx 1990