|
(CPR) |
|
|
|
|
|
The Coalition to Protect Research is a coalition of organizations committed to promoting public health through research. |
|
|
|
|
|
"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 |
The scientific community needs your help!
For the past three years, Congressional attacks have continued on peer-reviewed research funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Last year, the House of Representatives approved an amendment by voice vote sponsored by Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX) that would have rescinded funding for two specific peer-reviewed grants that he found to be outside the mission of the National Institute of Mental Health. While the amendment was ultimately removed from the final bill that funds NIH, and the grants continue to be funded, it has not discouraged House members from resorting to these strategies.
Congress has the responsibility to ensure that tax dollars are spent appropriately across all federal agencies. Likewise, NIH takes its responsibility seriously and relies on a rigorous peer review process involving thousands of scientists who volunteer their time and expertise to ensure that only scientific proposals of the highest quality are approved for funding. Therefore, it is disheartening that some members of Congress seek to undermine the integrity of the NIH peer- review process by arbitrarily targeting individual peer-reviewed research projects for de-funding.
While the 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 you. 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 the scientific peer-review process should be free from political interference.
Read the Petition
Updated June 05, 2006
|
