Maybe we should all apply?

I'd have made sure the jacket fitted comfortably before using "bloated" in a sentence.

Indeed, the 5 pointer will almost certainly get discussed, the other is likely to fall on the 'not discussed' side of the line. Fast forward one week, the 5 pointer is "fatally flawed" with scoring metrics and a summary of the discussion.... and the other applicant is going ??? next???

Or even set-aside funding....

Thought I'd practice with the new "tool" grants.nih.gov/funding/expl...

Look what I found.. grants.gov/search-resul...

(note the lack/absence of fiscal limits)

Often, the choice was not theirs. The heart wants what the heart wants ......(up to and including Tickle Me Elmo and other abominations).

Did he overstay his visa?

1) Cultural PTSD with respect to famine and child starvation.
2) Weren't big on Apartheid either.

Has he ever served on a Study Section? He'd see some dissent RIGHT THERE!

Say it with me... "clarity not consensus"...

I have a colleague who received their Y2 so close to the end of the cycle that they were unable to spend it all, and then were subsequently denied ANY carryover (they were looking at ~35% left). Currently they are fighting for the usual 20% but have received their Y3 NoA so not set back too far.

I believe that we should address this as "rigor of prior research" no?

The CDC was the only place where some clinical STI specimens could be typed and antibiotic resistance tested. It was madness to throw away that expertise and it is urgently needed.

Anyone can have an opinion (political or otherwise), but sometimes only one antibiotic can stop an infection.

European politics often manifest at the level of scoring.

"Null points" anyone?

This is a great piece and very helpful. One other problem I see among my colleagues is that we as scientists struggle to think and act collectively. Many people’s impulse and inclination is to focus even harder on the immediate needs of their own lab/career. But that will lose us precious time.

I've pitched versions of this idea to a number of NIH scientists, as well as university researchers over the last six weeks or so. So I decided to put it together into a post.

⚖️ Terminated NIH grant litigation update:

There's a hearing on a motion for preliminary injunction today at 11:30a EDT in Mass. v RFK et al, a case brought by some states against HHS. This is 1 of 2 diff. cases on this topic.

I'll be live-tweeting it later this morning. Check back on this thread.

Spending power is also possibly compromised. For example laboratory equipment in IRL has the standard VAT rate of 23%. Your money won't go far!

Logic says that if you rank your "pile", you'll find it easier to distribute your scores. As in Highlander, "there can be only one" (best or worst).

PIs who have proposals around the funding %ile should have ALL paperwork (IRB approvals, genetic/genomes, IACUC etc.) READY NOW should the JIT come tomorrow.

I am old enough to remember projects funded because the grant ahead of them couldn't be ready by close of the fiscal year. Similar scenario?

King K. Holmes, 87, Dies; Researcher Destigmatized Study of S.T.I.s He took a down-to-earth approach to sexually transmitted infections, a subject no one wanted to discuss, arriving at novel methods of treatment and prevention.

Some may not know King Holmes—but none of us would be doing this work, in the way we do it, without him. A mentor to generations of researchers and policymakers, he shaped the #STI and #HIV fields in lasting ways. He passed last month, www.nytimes.com/2025/04/08/s...

I’m reviewing for an institute targeted for dissolution. I don’t expect ANY grant that I review will be funded. All anyone will have to show for their efforts is a summary statement.

Correct, the term I would use is ‘survive’ rather than ‘profit’. If you are in a lifeboat do you pull the people you can reach on board or try to find the truly deserving in the waves and swell?

I review because a score is valuable to a PI when fighting for internal, institutional support. It could take years to get work funded now, how else can people demonstrate their worth? I can’t help the folks that are pulled, I can do my best for the rest.

miRNA... apologies to basic immune gene expression.

Make an LLM hallucinate just once..... you lose all faith (our prompt was T-cells and mRNA... it pretty much exploded)

The compressor on our shared walk in cold room had a conniption that made it too hot to touch.....IDC is what covers that extremely expensive repair. Clearly these guys have never been in a lab!

Bidirectional arrow indicating need for measles booster sorted by when vaccinated 1957-1989

www.google.com/imgres?q=gra...

I noticed "shuffling" of SROs on the CSR page and I have been asked to participate in a rescheduled SEP that has been moved out of CSR and into an institute for review. It is possible that the early events of 2025 have impacted staff etc.

I don't know, I suspect not because the Federal Register rule still applies. I think that the "Review Dates" page at CSR is now showing revised meeting dates for some meetings that were missed-they have an asterisk for "not held" but a date in the future that is at least two weeks from now.

Last week they were adding the "Asterix of Doom" within a couple of hours of the scheduled meeting start time. (Co-investigator had an R01 in EDIT study section). Meetings scheduled for today were not similarly treated.