Policy Alert Discussion Space

NIH Plan for Translational Center Draws Some Fire

Phil Chalker — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 14:12:00 GMT

A New York Times article on the plan by the National Institutes of Health to create a new National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) characterized the unit as a drug development center designed "to help create medicines." That characterization caused such a negative reaction from the academic community (already nervous about the reorganization) and from policy-making communities that NIH created a special feature on its website to detail "Fact & Fiction" and submitted letters to key House and Senate chairmen explaining the goal and vision behind NCATS. The NIH website states that the NCATS is "not intended to be a drug company" and that there is no plan to "cannibalize" budgets of other institutes.

Supreme Court Unanimously Upholds Background Checks on Agency Contractors’ Personnel

Phil Chalker — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 04:14:00 GMT

On January 19 the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision (with Justice Kagan recusing herself), reversed a ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of NASA v. Nelson. The Court held that NASA background checks of contractors at the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion Lab were tailored to the government's interest and therefore did not violate the scientists' privacy. The Court said that questions designed to determine an individual's emotional stability and history of illegal drug use were allowable, even for those not involved in classified activities. This type of background check has been in effect since 2005, based on a directive from the Department of Homeland Security.

State Department Letter on Visas and Ideological Exclusion

Phil Chalker — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:34:00 GMT

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) posted a letter from the State Department to AAUP, in which the Department notes that it does not engage in the practice of "ideological exclusion," or denying visas to individuals who may make negative comments about the United States. The letter notes that State will give "sympathetic weight" to visa applications from individuals coming to speak at academic events and lectures.

British Medical Journal Claims Autism-Vaccine Data Were Faked

Phil Chalker — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:55:00 GMT

On January 5 the British Medical Journal charged Andrew Wakefield with faking the data used in his research which purported to show a link between vaccines and autism, and which led thousands of parents to withhold vaccinations from their children. Wakefield's study was published in the journal Lancet in 1998, but the paper was formally retracted by Lancet in February 2010, after several of Wakefield's co-authors withdrew their names from the study. The BMJ's editors said Wakefield's work "was based not on bad science but on a deliberate fraud." Wakefield is no longer allowed to practice medicine in the UK, nor does he have a license to practice in the U.S., although he now runs an autism center in Austin, TX.

SBIR Reauthorization Remains on Temporary Extension

Phil Chalker — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:22:00 GMT

As the 111^th Congress drew to a close, the Senate passed a reauthorization of the Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) program (S. 4053). However, the House failed to take up the measure on the floor before the closing session, leaving the program authorized through a temporary extension through January 31, 2011. One point of contention between the Senate and House versions is that the Senate bill would increase the SBIR/STTR funding allocation from a federal agency's R&D budget from 2.5% to 3.5% over 10 years.

OSTP Releases Scientific Integrity Guidelines

Phil Chalker — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 21:32:00 GMT

Last Friday, more than 21 months after President Obama requested them, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released government-wide guidelines on scientific integrity. The concise (four page) document elaborates on the principles laid out by the President on March 9, 2009, providing guidance to executive departments and agencies on the implementation of those principles. Among its provisions, it calls for agencies to communicate scientific findings clearly, including an "explication of underlying assumptions; accurate contextualization of uncertainties; and a description of the probabilities associated with both optimistic and pessimistic projections, including best-case and worst-case scenarios where appropriate." Reaction to the guidelines was mixed, as some observers felt they left too much discretion to the individual agencies in implementation.

New NIH Translational Science Center

Phil Chalker — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:54:00 GMT

On December 7, the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Scientific Management Review Board (SMRB) recommended that NIH realign existing programs to create a new National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences that would focus on advancing translational sciences. The proposal is to merge select programs within the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), and the NIH Director's Common Fund, and, potentially, the new Cures Acceleration Network (CAN). NIH plans to present realignment plans to Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius early next year, in time to incorporate any changes into the HHS budget request. In the near term, a task force is seeking feedback as to what programs within NCRR should be merged into the new Center.

New Video Calls on Citizens to Identify “Wasteful” Grants

Phil Chalker — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 20:25:00 GMT

In an online video employing contemporary technology to follow in the footsteps of the late Senator William Proxmire's (D-WI) famous "golden fleece" awards, Rep. Adrian Smith (R-NE) has launched a "You Cut Citizen Review" asking viewers "to identify wasteful spending that should be cut and begin to hold agencies accountable for how they are spending your money." Rep. Smith's first target is the National Science Foundation, and he provides a helpful link to NSF's award search page and suggests keywords such as "culture," "media," "games," and "stimulus" that viewers might use to identify and report "wasteful" grants. An article in USAToday compares Smith's exercise with past congressional attempts to ridicule NSF grants on the basis of incomplete information.

President Requests Reviews of Guatemala Study and of Guidelines for Human Subjects Research

E Heath — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:03:00 GMT

President Obama has formally requested that his Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues undertake a “thorough fact-finding investigation into the specifics of the U.S. Public Health Service Sexually Transmitted Diseases Inoculation Study,” which involved the intentional infection of research subjects in Guatemala during the 1940s. This past October the U.S. government formally apologized to the people and government of Guatemala for the conduct of the experiments (see Policy Alert, October 4, 2010). The President also requested “a thorough review of human subjects protection to determine if Federal regulations and international standards adequately guard the health and well-being of participants in scientific studies supported by the Federal Government.” That review will begin January 2011, with a final report due in nine months.

What issues should the commission consider in its review of human subjects protection?

NIH Director Favors Merger of Institutes

E Heath — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:11:00 GMT

NIH Director Francis Collins released a statement last week saying that the creation of a new institute focusing on addictions, as recommended by NIH’s Scientific Management Review Board, “makes scientific sense and would enhance NIH's efforts to address the substance abuse and addiction problems.” This would include incorporating most current programs of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, as well as relevant programs from other Institutes and Centers, such as those at the National Cancer Institute and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Collins announced the creation of a task force to explore how forming the new institute could best be conducted. The task force plans to issue recommendations by next summer.

What do you think about this idea?

Louisiana Textbook Council Recommends Books Containing Evolution

E Heath — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:19:00 GMT

On November 12, a Louisiana State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) advisory committee recommended high school biology textbooks that contain strong treatment of evolution. Following passage of the anti-evolution Louisiana Science Education Act in 2008, state science education advocates feared the BESE council would vote to include disclaimers in textbooks that cast doubt on evolution or provisions on intelligent design—particularly since two lawmakers serving on the council were the act’s chief sponsors. Though the two lawmakers did vote against the books, an 8-4 majority voted for the books’ approval. The BESE will have a final vote during its December 7-9 meeting.

State legislatures will convene again in early 2011. Do you expect challenges to evolution education, and if so what form might they take?

Survey Reveals Dissatisfaction with Conflict-of-Interest Rules

E Heath — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:24:00 GMT

National Institutes of Health researchers are largely unhappy with the conflict-of-interest rules that resulted from a 2005 crackdown, according to a survey published recently in Academic Medicine. Eighty percent of surveyed respondents considered the rules too strict, and nearly that many said they impede NIH’s mission. The rules restrict scientists from consulting for drug companies and similar outside interests and limit their ability to invest in these companies. Not surprisingly, NIH collaboration with industry has fallen, according to the survey. But the ethics rules did not seem to affect productivity—e.g., papers published and patents sought. In related news, a report published by the conservative Manhattan Institute charged that conflict-of-interest rules at NIH and the Food and Drug Administration have gone too far.

How do you feel about the conflict-of-interest rules put forth by your funder and/or institution?

Geoengineering In the News

E Heath — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 20:11:00 GMT

The Government Accountability Office issued a report that calls for an entity such as the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to establish a strategy for geoengineering research in the context of the federal response to climate change. GAO's analysis found agencies spent $1.9 million on research directly related to geoengineering over the past two years. Meanwhile, House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN) released a report, Engineering the Climate: Research Needs and Strategies for International Collaboration, that was prepared in cooperation with the United Kingdom’s House of Commons S&T Committee. The report identifies U.S. federal geoengineering research capabilities and calls for additional international research and engagement on geoengineering. In releasing the report, Chairman Gordon reiterated his position that he was “not in favor of deploying climate engineering” but wants to build the research and governance foundation. Meanwhile, delegates at the Convention on Biological Diversity agreed to call for a moratorium on geoengineering schemes "that may affect biodiversity."

What is your opinion on geoengineering--and the increased attention it has generated recently?

Court Ruling Limits Teacher Free-Speech Rights

E Heath — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 02:07:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit has ruled that “only the school board has ultimate responsibility for what goes on in the classroom, legitimately giving it a say over what teachers may (or may not) teach in the classroom.” The decision comes after the contract of an Ohio teacher was not renewed following community concerns about readings she assigned to high school English classes. The Court of Appeals relied on a 2006 Supreme Court ruling, Garcetti v. Ceballos, that public employees do not have First Amendment protection for speech “pursuant to” their official duties.

Public Understanding of Climate Change Study Released

E Heath — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:24:00 GMT

The Yale Project on Climate Change Communication released a new report titled Americans’ Knowledge of Climate Change, which found that 63% of Americans believe that global warming is happening but many do not understand why, and that many gaps in knowledge and misconceptions exist. The report noted that despite the recent climate science controversies, Americans trust scientists and scientific organizations far more than any other source of information about global warming.

If scientists are the most trusted sources for information about global warming, do they have a responsibility to educate the public about this issue? If so, how can this type of public engagement be encouraged?