Naomi Charalambakis, PhD

Absolutely spot-on. Thank you for shedding light and providing essential context on this topic that's all too often misrepresented (sometimes purposefully). Americans for Medical Progress submitted comment in response to the workshop/recent changes: www.amprogress.org/wp-content/u...

Ensuring peer review moves forward is essential in advancing biomedical research and supporting its dedicated workforce.

It's refreshing to see "Notice of Meeting" instead of "Notice of Closed Meeting" for a change! The NIDDK open session is quite short and sparse on details ("Council Business") but I am cautiously hopeful that this is a sign that we can get back to some degree of normalcy.

And 1 CDC meeting:

- CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices will meet April 15-16 (8:00 am - 5:30 pm) [Request for Comments also announced and must be received by April 11]

So far we have 2 NIH meetings:

- NIDDK advisory council will meet April 24 (open session 4:00 - 4:30)
- NIEHS Board of Scientific Counselors (intramural review) will meet starting May 5 (8:30 - 10:15 am)

In some welcome news, federal advisory council meetings--including open session portions--are back on and being published in the Federal Register 👏 . Announcements are slated for official publication on Monday (March 24) but are currently available on Public Inspection.

Full statement available here: www.amprogress.org/research-new...

No, the intended term was not transgenic mice, and this important work in reproductive biology provides hope for millions of Americans. As someone who had a child through IVF, I am grateful for scientists' willingness to pursue answers.

Americans for Medical Progress issued a statement to address the misinformation regarding "transgender mice."

NIH centralizes peer review to improve efficiency and strengthen integrity The proposed approach is expected to save more than $65 million annually.

NEWS: NIH proposes plan to centralize all "first level" peer review within the agency's Center for Scientific Review: www.nih.gov/news-events/...

This is not government efficiency. This is not government transparency that Kennedy so desperately vowed to uphold. This is reckless policy that will hinder scientific progress and cost lives.

Without public input, policies will not only be implemented irrationally quickly but it will occur without consideration of the needs of the stakeholders the Department is intended to serve.

The TL;DR version of this is that by rescinding this waiver, HHS is no longer required to seek public comment on rule changes related to loans, grants, benefits, contracts, etc. So much of what the health and science community do relies on federal funding distributed through grants and contracts.

The next "Friday Frenzy" is here: HHS proposing to eliminate rulemaking public comment periods.

Set to be officially posted in the Federal Register on Monday, HHS says the Department is rescinding the Richardson Waiver.
public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-03300.pdf