|
(CPR) |
|
|
|
|
|
The Coalition to Protect Research is a coalition of organizations committed to promoting public health through research. Sexual health and behavior research is essential to providing a scientific foundation for sound public health prevention and intervention programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
"When we looked at the public-health relevance, there was no question that these projects should have been funded and should continue to be funded." NIH Director Elias Zerhouni The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1/13/04 ****** "I strongly urge the Members to resist the temptation to select a few grants for defunding because they do not like the sound of them based on one paragraph out of what probably was a number of pages of information. It would set a dangerous precedent and put a chill on medical research if we start to micromanage individual NIH grants. This has worked well over the years. We have had enormous progress because of these grants in achieving medical knowledge and giving the public a better health care system. I do not think this body, this committee, wants to get into the process of reviewing 120,000 grants and trying to pick 40,000 out of that group for funding." Rep. Ralph Regula -- Chairman, House Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Subcommittee, fHouse floor July 11, 2003 ****** I have served on the subcommittee that deals with NIH for a long time, and the one thing I came to understand very quickly is that the day that we politicize NIH research, the day we decide which grants are going to be approved on the basis of a 10-minute horseback debate in the House of Representatives with 434 of the 435 Members in this place who do not even know what the grant is, that is the day we will ruin science research in this country. We have no business making political judgments about those kinds of issues. Rep. David Obey -- Ranking Member, House Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Subcommittee, House floor July 11, 2003 ****** "When you look at the impact of sexually transmitted disease, you're talking about HIV/AIDS and many others that affect millions of people and their reproductive lives." NIH Director Elias Zerhouni USA Today, Jan. 13, 2004
****** "Decisions about medical research should be made by scientists, not by politicians promoting an ideological agenda.” Democratic House Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi, July 2003
******
"Here we have people saying, 'I don't like how that disease was contracted, so I don't want to study that disease.' It's equivalent to sticking your head in the sand. It's very important that the scientific community rises up and objects to the imposition of ideology in these areas."
Alan Leshner, President and CEO, AAAS, Washington Post, 1/19/04
CPR sponsors Congressional briefing -- Lost in Translation: Public Health Implications of Sexual Health Research The Scientific, Public Health, and Advocacy Community Reacts NIH Responds to Congress (Download letter to Congress) CPR Sends Letter of Support to Dr. Zerhouni Dr. Zerhouni Sex-Related Research at NIH Addresses Critical Public Health Issues 2002 Surgeon General's Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior
Become a Member of CPR - download membership form (pdf) ******
****************
For more information about the Coalition contact:
Angela Sharpe (COSSA) at (202) 842-3525
or
Karen Studwell (APA) at (202) 336-5585 |
Support Public Health Research Click here to read and sign the petition
Over the last year, scientific organizations have been working to defend the research priorities of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the agency that funds nearly $28 billion in public health research each year. At the same time, there has been a marked increase in Congressional concerns about the appropriateness of NIH funding decisions for grants that were approved through NIH's rigorous merit review process, the gold standard for determining research funding allocations worldwide.
In July 2003, the House of Representatives even voted on an amendment that would have cut off funding from five specific peer-reviewed grants that some members of Congress decided were not scientifically relevant or deserving of federal funds. While the vote failed, congressional pressure on NIH to change its funding decisions continue.
In response to congressional inquiries, NIH Director Elias Zerhouni conducted a comprehensive review of the NIH's human sexuality research portfolio. He concluded that the research projects in question were appropriately reviewed and that NIH's human sexuality portfolio, the main target of congressional inquiries, is not funded disproportionately to the public health burden of diseases linked to sexual behavior and sexual function such as HIV/AIDS, STD's or infertility. Further, there is abundant evidence of the importance of behavior in the prevalence and severity of some of our major, and most costly chronic diseases (including STDs), and understanding better how to influence behavior is urgently needed.
While organizations representing scientists, researchers and those advocating for federally-funded research on a wide range of health concerns are doing their best to defend peer review and the NIH's decision-making process, Congress needs to hear from their own constituents, especially those not engaged in research, that are concerned about public health in this country.
We encourage you to sign the petition supporting scientific principles. We would like to share this petition with your Representatives and Senators in Congress to show them that you, their constituents, are paying attention to their votes on these issues and that Americans across the country also believe that the scientific merit review process should determine how our federal research dollars are spent and should be free from political interference. More importantly, this is critical and much-needed public health research in areas that affect millions of Americans.
Click here to read and sign the petition
Updated June 17, 2005
|
