Author Archives: Katie Wilkinson

Action Alert: Ask Congress to Pass FY 2015 Funding Bill and Bill Reducing Regulatory Burden

The continuing resolution currently funding the government expires on December 11th. Draft bills increasing federal science funding have been approved by both the Senate and House Appropriations, but have yet to be considered by the full Congress. Please write to your representatives urging them to pass an omnibus spending bill in the next few weeks.

Link to the FASEB Action Alert Page where you can contact your legislators

As mentioned in the last post, the House passed HR 5056, the Research and Development Efficiency Act. This bill would decrease the regulatory burden on universities and investigators. Contact your senators and ask them to pass this bill before the end of the Congressional session.

Link to the FASEB Action Alert Page where you can contact your senators

The Post-Election Outlook for Science

Starting in January both the Senate and House will be under Republican control. Historically, this result was no surprise. Since WWII all presidents in their second term have faced a Senate of the opposite party. One of the biggest questions on my mind is what will a Republican controlled Senate mean for science policy? Sadly I don’t have a crystal ball, but I’ve tried to summarize some potentially good and bad news for the coming Congress. For even more information about this topic, I highly recommend Science Magazine’s After Election 2014 series.

Science Funding

Recently a few bills offering ways to stabilize and grow the NIH budget, including the Accelerating Biomedical Research Act and the American Cures Act, have been introduced in Congress. In a Republican Congress these bills have little chance of passing, but there is some hope a bipartisan bill sponsored by Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) may have more luck. The Invest for Healthy Futures Act provides an incentive for lawmakers to fund 5 federal research agencies (NIH, CDC, FDA, BARDA, and AHRQ) at least at the previous year’s level plus biomedical inflation. The funds for this bill are offset by cuts elsewhere, which is potentially attractive to conservative lawmakers. Senator Hatch  is currently the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee and is a likely choice for the Chairmanship, which could also help the bill’s prospects.

Regulatory Burden

There is some hope that Congress may act on streamlining the regulatory burden on grants administration and reporting. The House passed the bipartisan Research and Development Efficiency Act in July that aims to allow researchers to spend more time actually doing science and less time on administrative tasks. This bill is championed by Representative Bucshon (R-IN), the chair of the House’s Science Committee Research Panel. As with everything, the devil is in the details and it is unclear exactly what regulations will be altered if this bill passes the full Congress. For more information on this issue, I highly recommend this Science Magazine piece by David Malakoff.

Action on Climate Change

One of the more disturbing effects of the election for science is the change in leadership in the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works. The current Chair is Barbara Boxer (D-CA), a strong supporter of environmental protections. The ranking Republican on the Committee is James Inhofe (R-OK), a climate change skeptic who has literally written a book arguing that position (The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future). The last time he chaired this committee, Inhofe frequently invited ‘experts‘ with dubious qualifications to argue against action on climate change. The scientific evidence is overwhelming that man-made climate change is occurring, the only controversy is how severe the effects will be and how much we need to curb emissions to prevent the most disastrous effects. Wasting time arguing over whether climate change is occurring will only hurt our country in the long run. To end the post on a slightly lighter note, I’ll leave you with coverage of this issue by the Colbert Report and Last Week Tonight.

Talk to Your Friends and Family About Science: Ebola in the US

Somewhat inevitably with the global nature of travel these days, the first Ebola case in the US has been reported in Dallas. While this is obviously scary for the patient and his family, there is almost zero chance this will lead to a widespread outbreak in the US. Below are a few things to remember about Ebola.

Only people showing symptoms are contagious

Although the Ebola patient did travel on an airplane, he was not showing symptoms at that time and therefore was not contagious. The public health team in Dallas has traced his contacts since arriving in the US and will be monitoring those people to ensure they do not develop Ebola (Ebola has a 21 day incubation period).

Ebola is only transmitted through infected bodily fluids

Ebola is actually relatively hard to get. Ebola is not spread via airborne droplets and there is no reason to believe airborne transmission of Ebola will develop. Like with HIV, you must come in contact with bodily fluids from a person showing symptoms to contract Ebola. Just being in the same room with the person will not lead to Ebola spread.

The US Public Health infrastructure is equipped to deal with Ebola

Unlike in West Africa, the US has a robust public health system, well trained medical professionals in every community, and no shortage of the personal protective equipment necessary to prevent the spread of Ebola. In fact, Ebola related viruses like Marburg and Lassa Fever, have already made it to the US and no widespread outbreak occurred.

We should be more worried about the effect of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa

While we really shouldn’t be worried about a US Ebola outbreak, we should be more worried about the havoc occurring in West Africa. The outbreak is causing a tremendous amount of suffering in West Africa. The public health system is completely overwhelmed and non-Ebola medical care is suffering as well. There are extreme shortages of trained medical professionals, personal protective equipment, beds for those suffering from Ebola, and other basic medical supplies.

If you are worried about Ebola, consider donating to Doctors Without Borders to help fight the spread of Ebola in West Africa. Aid groups on the ground, like Doctors Without Borders, are also asking for help from any trained medical professionals willing to volunteer in West Africa.

A Few Other Resources About Ebola in the US:

CDC Ebola Information Website and Press Release

Tara C. Smith’s article in the Guardian about why we shouldn’t panic about a US Ebola Epidemic

Three Reasons Why You Should Meet with Your Elected Officials

Last week a SJSU student from my lab, Anusha Allawala, and I had the opportunity to meet with Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren and a staff member at her San Jose District office.  Members of Congress spend the summer recess in their home districts and unless you live near DC this is often the easiest time to meet with them in person. I had no idea how accessible elected officials actually are until this past year. Members of Congress and their staff spend a large portion of their time meeting with and listening to their constituents and this is one way that you can help ensure that the issue you are passionate about is on their radar. To set up this meeting I emailed the staffer in charge of scheduling (you can find this online or ask your professional society’s advocacy office for help). Even though I waited until early August when her schedule was already full to request the meeting, I was offered a cancellation spot and was still able to get a 20 minute meeting.

croppedLofgren

 Katie Wilkinson, Representative Lofgren, and Anusha Allawala

Here are 3 reasons why you should meet with your elected officials:

1) You can give your elected officials a personal story to illustrate the effect of policies in Washington.

It is human nature to relate more easily to an individual’s tragedy than dry numbers. The decrease in science funding has had tremendous effects across the board, but you can help your elected officials understand what it means in their district. I asked Anusha to join the meeting because she is currently supported by the  US Department of Education’s McNair Scholars Program, which provides mentorship and funding to low income first generation college students and/or students from underrepresented groups interested in PhD programs.  In the past few years the budget for this program, and many similar programs, has been cut drastically. Now McNair Scholars can only receive one year of support instead of two and there is no budget for research supplies. Anusha was able to tell the Congresswoman how important this program has been in helping prepare her for graduate school, especially since she is a recent immigrant and first generation college student. As Congresswoman Lofgren was also a first generation college student you could tell that she really connected with Anusha’s story and the importance of these federally funded training programs. Perhaps Anusha’s story (or yours) will end up in a speech someday.

2) You can thank your elected official for their support of your issue and encourage their continued support.

In the Bay Area, we are lucky to be represented by people who understand the value of science funding and typically support increased levels of funding. I was told that one of the reasons I was offered first chance at the cancellation spot was that Representative Lofgren is very supportive of science and especially women in science. Even though the Congresswoman has signed Dear Colleague letters in support of increased NIH and NSF funding this year it is still important to make sure that she is thanked for her support and reminded that science funding is valued by constituents and institutions in her district. If your elected official is not in support of your issue, an in person meeting has the potential to change their mind.

3) You can offer yourself as a resource to make sure that accurate science is used in making public policy.

In my preparation for the meeting I learned that Representative Lofgren introduced the Zs to As Act in 1998 that would have pushed high school start times later to align with what we know about the adolescent circadian rhythm (sadly the bill never passed). This is a great example of public policy based on science and at our meeting Representative Lofgren told us she had consulted with sleep specialists at Stanford while she was drafting the bill. Scientists are in the perfect position to offer their expertise or network of knowledgeable colleagues to help develop scientifically sound public policy. Most professional societies have an advocacy office that can help you put your elected officials in contact with relevant experts.

Hopefully now you are convinced to set up a meeting with your members of Congress. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about logistics. 

Keep the Momentum of the Ice Bucket Challenge Going: Urge Your Legislators to Support the Accelerate Biomedical Research Act

This summer you couldn’t miss the videos of friends and celebrities dumping themselves with ice water and challenging others to do the same and/or donate to the ALS Association. Over 300 million people donated $100 million and counting to the ALS Association thanks to the viral ice bucket challenge (as of Aug 29th). Money donated to the ALS Association supports research for a cure for ALS, advocacy efforts, public education and outreach, and community services for those suffering form ALS. You can learn about ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s Disease) in one fun cartoon by Dwayne Godwin & Jorge Cham.

ALS

 

While the outpouring of individual charity has been heartening, disease specific foundations don’t have the resources needed to fund research into cures on their own. To date the ALS Association has committed $99 million to support biomedical research on ALS compared to over $229 million invested by the NIH in ALS research in just the past 5 years.  The NIH and other federal science funding agencies also have more consistent funding and the ability to strategically spend money on basic science research in addition to large scale clinical trials. As I’ve discussed before, the sequester, biomedical inflation, and flat funding to the NIH and NSF have decreased federal funding for biomedical science by ~20% since 2003.

So, keep supporting your favorite charities, but increase the chances that biomedical researchers find a cure by asking your elected officials to support continued investment in science. Call your representatives and ask them to support Senator Tom Harkin’s Accelerate Biomedical Research Act. This bill would increase NIH funding in 2021 to the level it would have been if funding had kept pace with inflation after 2003 ($46.2B).

Go here for Research!America’s easy contact form and email template supporting the Accelerate Biomedical Research Act. If you prefer to call your representatives you can find contact information here.