February 9, 2004

Volume 23, Issue 3

 ZERHOUNI DEFENDS THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH'S SUPPORT OF SEXUAL HEALTH RESEARCH

On January 26, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Elias Zerhouni forcefully responded, via letter, to those Members of Congress who have attacked the agency for its support of research on human sexuality.  The NIH Director conveyed to Members that he “fully support(s) NIH’s continued investment in research on human sexuality,” based on the findings of the NIH Institutes directors.  “I believe,” wrote Zerhouni, “that the peer review process, which is fundamental to the ability of NIH to conduct effective and high quality research, has worked properly and provided a level of valuable and independent review in this important area of research.”

Zerhouni notes that the agency’s mandate (Section 301 of the Public Health Service Act) requires the NIH to “conduct and support research, investigations, experiments, demonstrations, and studies related to the causes, diagnosis, treatment, control, and prevention of physical and mental diseases and impairments of man.”

Constant Battle against Illness and   

Disease . . . Has To Include Behavioral and Social Factors

In the letter, the NIH Director allows that “much of the success in improving the Nation’s health is attributable to research advances furthering the understanding of human biology.”  He emphasizes, however, that “the constant battle against illness and disease . . . cannot be limited to biological factors but has to include behavioral and social factors as well.  Unhealthy human behaviors have been estimated to be the proximal cause of over half of the disease burden in our country. . . [T]he spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and sex-related or other violent behaviors are at the core of many of the illnesses we are trying to prevent and control in our diverse society today.”

Zerhouni acknowledges the “important role” that both the Congress and the Administration have in priority setting.  Noting that NIH “must be accountable to both, as well as the American public,” he announced that he is “initiating discussions with NIH Institute Directors about mechanisms the agency could establish to ensure that this research is better presented to the public so that they may understand its relevance to public health and “that it is in fact prioritized appropriately.”

Zerhouni explained that he arrived at his conclusion after directing NIH officials to conduct a comprehensive review of the human sexuality research that is supported by the agency “with a particular focus on the lists of grants that have been cited by some Members of Congress.”  Directors of the relevant Institutes were also asked by Zerhouni “to review each and every grant to help answer the following questions . . . which [he believes are] the essence of the objections raised by some Members.”

1.  Are these grants relevant to the public health needs of our country; i.e., is this research a good use of taxpayers’ dollars and why?

2.  Are the research and its methods scientifically and ethically appropriate?

3.  Was the integrity of the process by which these grants were reviewed and funded at NIH compromised?

4.  Is the funding for this research area disproportionate relative to the burden of sexually related diseases as compared to that of other diseases?

Letters were sent to Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; and Reps. W.J. “Billy” Tauzin (R-LA) and John D. Dingell (D-MI), Chair and Ranking Member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.  Letters of explanation were also sent to Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Reps. Ralph Regula (R-OH) and David Obey (D-WI), Chair and Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services.