 |
 |
In a message dated 12/19/98 3:52:00 PM Central Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes: << Your explanation is what I had understood previously to happen. What I don't understand is how we can "object" to the distribution as it now exists if we do not know that the distribution (related/vs. non related) of funds for other disease groups. >> Rita, I am working with a minimum of facts. Are you saying that perhaps diabetes or breast cancer might have some related funds that actually fund PD research? If you are, the answer is I don't think so. The basic problem is decades old. For some reason, PD has been treated like a poor cousin in the allocation of federal research dollars for years. In the '93 or '94 budget, it got just over $ 27 per patient (about $30 million ), while others were getting much (in some cases much, much) more. This didn't seem right to Alan Bonander, Joan Samuelson, and others who started calling attention to this inequity. Hence the Mo and all the surrounding hullabaloo. Regards, WHH 55/38/37