Bio-Rad has sponsored the development of
this site to advance the productivity of the American Biotechnology sector and the fine people who
work in it across the country. We invite readers to contribute content:
posters, tools, research and presentations, articles white papers, multimedia, music
downloads and entertainment, conference announcements, videos. Please contact firstname.lastname@example.org more information.
Download the Protein Blotting Guide
Download the Stem Cell Guide for Life Science Researchers
:: Posted by American Biotechnologist on 12-17-2014
In 2013 the buzzword for the state of affairs for scientific funding in the US was sequestration. That year saw huge hits to American government funding of the NIH and other scientific endeavors that severely hampered research activities throughout the country. In 2014, there was a slight increase in life science funding, however, it was not enough to put American research back on track to where the NIH hoped it would be. While scientists remain hopeful that 2015 will be the year of recovery, a bill released last week by the Senate Spending Subcommittee seems to suggest otherwise.
While organizations such as NASA and the National Science Foundation will be receiving increases of $364 million and $172 million respectively, the NIH will be receiving an increase of $150 million which falls quite a bit short of what is needed to fund America’s largest health sciences granting agency. To further add insult to injury, the 0.5% increase still leaves the agency with less funding than it had prior to the 2013 sequestration.
The few research areas that will benefit from the 2015 budget include $1.2 Billion for the National Institute of Aging and $238 Million for Ebola research.
:: Posted by American Biotechnologist on 04-29-2014
According to a new policy released earlier this month, the National Institute of Health (NIH) will now allow unsuccessful applicants to resubmit their application for the next application round without including any new information in the resubmitted grant.
The NIH claimed that due to the funding crisis, many meritorious applications, which would have otherwise been funded, were turned down. According to the old policy, the rejected applications could not be resubmitted in their original form and would have had to be reworked before being resubmitted. The effect of this policy was that applicants would have to add new material in the resubmitted grant, despite the fact that the application was strong to begin with. Furthermore, young investigators, already dejected by the original grant rejection, were more apt to leave their positions rather than having to redo and resubmit their original grant. By allowing scientists to resubmit their original grant without significant changes, the NIH will significantly increase the number of meritorious applications in subsequent rounds.
Until October 2008, the NIH did not have resubmission rules governing the grant application process. In a sweeping change in 2008, the NIH placed restrictions on the type of content applicants were allowed to resubmit and instituted a two strike rule that meant that the applicant needed to substantially re-design the project rather than simply change the application in response to previous reviews. The new policy reverses that ruling and will hopefully encourage more young investigators to pursue their dreams without the fear of rejection or failure.
:: Posted by American Biotechnologist on 03-06-2012
Proteomics is about to take a big leap forward, that is if the NIH can help it.
Last week, the NIH put out a request for information aimed at determining how best to accelerate research in disruptive proteomics technologies. The organization is hoping that submissions will aim to greatly outperform current mass spec technologies and introduce an all new way of advancing proteomic questions.
According to the proposal:
The Disruptive Proteomics Technologies (DPT) Working Group of the NIH Common Fund wishes to identify gaps and opportunities in current technologies and methodologies related to proteome-wide measurements. For the purposes of this RFI, “disruptive” is defined as very rapid, very significant gains, similar to the “disruptive” technology development that occurred in DNA sequencing technology.
These are exciting times for the field of proteomics. Don’t be left behind! Click here to find out more on how to get involved today!