During a visit to MIT, Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker stressed the need for government investment in research, reports Jeff Engels for Xconomy. “Our investment in R&D in this country is flat since, I think, 1980. It’s actually quite concerning at a time when the rest of the world, as you said, is not standing still,” said Pritzker.
New research by Prof. Andrew Lo shows that the criteria currently used to evaluate whether drugs are safe and effective is too strict, reports Carolyn Johnson for The Washington Post. The study suggests that, “for many devastating diseases, the current standards are too risk-averse, erring on the side of keeping drugs off the market.”
In an article for The Washington Post, MIT President L. Rafael Reif writes that the U.S. needs to develop a more effective way of bringing new innovations from the lab to the marketplace. “The United States needs a more systematic way to help its bottled-up new-science innovators deliver their ideas to the world,” Reif explains.
Prof. Robert Langer, winner of the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering, speaks with Joel Brown of The Boston Globe about his current research and the need for government support for basic research. “So much good stuff has come out of basic research, research that you don’t really know where it’s going to go. So you want people to be able to get grants to do that,” explains Langer.
Nidhi Subbaraman of BetaBoston writes that Prof. Feng Zhang has been awarded $1 million from the Paul G. Allen Family Foundation to study brain cells. The grant will fund a project that will use the gene-editing technique CRISPR to “find ways to streamline or speed up [neuron cell] growth by turning genes on and off.”
Rohan Banerjee writes for The Tech about a new MIT report that examines 15 areas of research that would benefit from increased government support. Prof. Marc Kastner explains that the report is aimed at informing political leaders of the importance of basic research. “It’s important to remind Congress and the public that the health of the country depends on doing research,” he says.
Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik writes that declining government investment in basic research is contributing to a U.S. innovation deficit, citing a new MIT report examining how funding cuts are impacting different areas of research. The report finds that declining support for basic research is “tantamount to mortgaging our scientific future.”
The Boston Herald highlights a new MIT report that examines how decreased government funding for basic research is holding back advances in 15 fields. Science funding is “the lowest it has been since the Second World War as a fraction of the federal budget,” explains Professor Marc Kastner.
A new MIT report finds that declining government investment in basic research could be driving top academic talent overseas, writes RobertMcMillan of The Wall Street Journal. “We are undercutting ourselves by not supporting basic science,” says Prof. Andrew Lo.
Salon reporter Joanna Rothkopf writes that a report prepared by MIT researchers finds that declining government investment in basic research is creating an innovation deficit. “The report warns that the lack of adequate funding for sciences in the U.S. is threatening 15 fields, including neurobiology, cybersecurity, infectious diseases and robotics,” Rothkopf writes.
A new MIT report examines the growing innovation deficit caused by declining government support for basic research, reports Sharon Begley for Reuters. Prof. Marc Kastner, who led the committee that prepared the report, explained that the decline in basic research funding, "really threatens America's future."
Craig Lemoult of WGBH News speaks with MIT researchers about a new report examining the impacts of declining government support for basic research. Prof. Marc Kastner notes that many of the “technologies that have made our lives better” stem from basic research advances.
Inside Higher Ed highlights a new report prepared by a committee of MIT researchers that examines the need for increased federal funding for basic research. The report “examines the lost opportunities for science and for U.S. competitiveness vs. other nations due to inadequate federal support for basic research.”
Prof. Philip Sharp writes for The Huffington Post that the government needs to increase support for cancer research. Sharp and his co-author Sherry Lansing, founder and CEO of The Sherry Lansing Foundation, explain that current progress again cancer “can be turned into a tidal wave if we as a nation devote the right level of funding, intensity, and collaboration.”
Richard Harris reports on research by Professor Richard Larson that found that the effects of funding changes to the National Institute of Health on research are amplified due to the way the institute distributes grants. “Larson's analysis offers lessons for avoiding the pain of boom-and-bust funding,” writes Harris.