You are currently browsing the archives for the life science funding category.

Archive for the ‘life science funding’ Category

Your opportunity to influence NIH funding

 :: Posted by avi_wener on 07-27-2011

Rarely do scientists get an opportunity to influence the funding direction of the largest granting agency in the United States, the National Institute of Health. Yet that is exactly what we are being asked to do in the NIH’s latest request for information.

The NIH is requesting that the scientific community send in its ideas on how best to support or accelerate neuroscience research. Responses should address:

  1. areas of neuroscience research that could be accelerated by the development of specific research resources or tools
  2. major opportunities for, and impediments to, advancing neuroscience research
  3. the 2-3 highest priority tools or resources needed to capitalize on the scientific opportunities and overcome obstacles to progress in neuroscience research
  4. how NIH Blueprint might best facilitate the development of these tools/resources

Your answers could influence where neuroscience funding is directed over the next couple of years so be sure to checkout the NIH website to add your two cents!

Raising Scientific Funds the Amazon Way

 :: Posted by avi_wener on 07-13-2011

There was an interesting story in the NY Times the other day which was picked by GenomeWeb’s The Daily Scan regarding a couple of biologists who have turned to non-traditional sources of funding to partially fund their research experiments.

The scientific duo from the Robert J. Bernard Biological Field Station in Claremont, Calif, have raised close to $5,000 from online sales of t-shirts and trading cards which will pay for their lab equipment and travel expenses required to conduct their studies in Mexico. While this level of funding certainly would not be sufficient for even the smallest molecular biology lab, their funding methodology is unique and I believe that they should be commended for their resourcefulness.

As we have mentioned in the past, non-peer reviewed fundraising is not entirely new to the biological research community. In a post written several months ago, we told you how the Kanzius foundation is on its way to raising $250,000 through a Facebook campaign. We also told you about the Search for Research campaign promoted on BenchFly which helps raise money for research using a search engine advertizing strategy.

We all hate writing grants and although non-traditional fundraising efforts will not replace traditional sources of funding any time soon, it is still fun to hear about the different activities people are willing to try in order to fund their research.

What “out of the box” fundraising efforts have you come across?

Majority of voters believe federal government should support the biotechnology industry

 :: Posted by avi_wener on 07-05-2011

A new national survey of 800 American voters by the Biotechnology Industry Organization – and conducted by the bipartisan pairing of Public Opinion Strategies and Hart Research Associates – has found that during the current economic slowdown, while the nation’s leaders are making hard choices about our national economic policies, a majority (53%) of voters believe the federal government should support the biotechnology industry through either tax policies or direct funding.

“These numbers are a testament to the life-saving scientific research being conducted by biotechnology industry. Every day biotech researchers are working to cure deadly diseases, find cleaner alternative fuels, protect us against the threats of bioterrorism and feed a hungry world. It is reassuring to know that our hard work lines up shoulder-to-shoulder with the priorities of the American people,” said Jim Greenwood, CEO of the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

The survey, conducted between June 5 and 7, found that American voters embrace a continued federal commitment to biotechnology priorities such as research dedicated to finding alternative sources of energy, life-saving medicines and cures. In fact, the survey found that the key biotechnology industry issues are ranked by voters as either “extremely” or “very” important – behind only the economy, education, reducing the deficit/government spending – and alongside of issues such as combating terrorism and reducing taxes.

Over three-quarters of voters (76%) are supportive of a continued commitment to federal spending on biotech research after hearing that the industry is working to cure diseases such as Alzheimer’s, cancer, diabetes and Parkinson’s – and that these cures will eventually help patients, cut federal spending and save the American budget trillions of dollars.

Greenwood concluded, “These numbers reflect American faith in the promise of biotechnology. Each day, the men and women of the biotech industry are focused on developing the key breakthroughs that will allow Americans to not only live longer, but to lead better, healthier and more productive lives.”

Click here to download a copy of the survey results.

The long and winding road to a PhD

 :: Posted by avi_wener on 06-21-2011

I just saw this infographic on Online PhD Programs. Crazy and sad!

The Long and Winding Road to a PhD
Via: Online PhD Programs

Low funding levels impede translation of stem cell research into therapy

 :: Posted by avi_wener on 05-26-2011

We’re so close, yet so far. Despite the many advances in stem cell research over the past decade, low funding of basic science research is making it difficult for scientists to move stem cell therapies from the bench to the bedside.

A new article published by Cell Press in the May 26 issue of the journal Neuron provides comprehensive insight into the current status of neural stem cell research and the sometimes labyrinthine pathways leading to stem cell-based therapies. The perspective on translating neural stem cell research into clinical therapeutics is part of a special issue of Neuron devoted to neural stem cells and neurogenesis and is published in collaboration with the May issue of Cell Stem Cell, which also has a selection of reviews on this topic.

Neurological disease and injury are a major cause of disability worldwide, and there is a pressing need to find reparative therapeutics for the central nervous system (CNS). Although stem cell therapies represent the frontier of regenerative medicine, the “bench to bedside” leap where scientific discoveries in the laboratory are translated to actual patient therapeutics faces many challenging hurdles.

“Stem cell research is one of the most rapidly developing areas of science and medicine,” says study author Dr. Sally Temple from the Neural Stem Cell Institute in Rensselaer, New York. “The explosive rise in discoveries and technologies that we see in the basic research labs has yet to enter the pipeline, and there is an enormous gap between what we can do at the bench and what we see in the current clinical trials. It is imperative that we work towards making the process of translation more effective and affordable.”

In their article, Dr. Temple and colleagues describe the current status of stem cell-based CNS therapies, analyze currently approved clinical trials, and discuss key issues associated with translational progress. The authors report that many basic scientists are struggling with low funding levels and that funding cutbacks substantially impede new research directions. They suggest that successfully transitioning from the lab to the clinics requires a comprehensive and collaborative team effort among researchers, clinicians, regulatory agencies, patient advocacy groups, ethics bodies, and industry, and they stress that pioneering this new partnership model is essential for smooth translational path that will improve the chance that the health benefits of research reach patients.

“There is no doubt that stem cell research and application is opening great opportunities in CNS regenerative therapies and, although our survey shows that we are still at relatively early stages of defining safety for human trials, stupendous strides are being made in preclinical studies,” says Dr. Temple. “However, we must engage basic researchers and their institutions to ensure that they participate in the rewards of successful translation and benefit from revenue return that will fund further creative discoveries. We envision a much more concerted effort towards translation that would make the process more accessible and efficient, forging new private/public partnerships that will spread both risks and benefits in the process. Ultimately, the rewards of solving this problem could be seen at every level, from the next generation of young scientists to the patients. We need to take steps soon, as the challenge posed by neurological disorders is growing.”

Source: Cell Press (via EurekAlert!)