US35 - Increase the NIH budget
| If you like jobs, medicines, and progress, increase the NIH budget from a very tiny amount of spending to a tiny amount | |
|
|
|
Description
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the world's largest investor in biomedical research (for now). It is the primary source of funding for scientific and clinical efforts that translate into just about every single health-related advance. Each of these efforts translates into numerous new companies that create jobs, improve the economy, and, most importantly, help people. It succeeds despite getting less than 3% of discretionary spending in our budget, which has already made it difficult to train and retain the best scientists, doctors, and researchers in the fields that need them. An even slight increase in the amount of funding would translate into numerous innovative projects being initiated across the country, employing many people and improving the skillset of our population. And it may result in discoveries that lead to new treatments, better healthcare, and improved livelihoods.
Arguments
The already pathetically decreasing amount of funding (currently about 7% of grant applications are funded) results in many such people either leaving the field or moving to different countries to pursue innovative work. The Congressional response to this is, predictably, to target the NIH for further cuts. That move is counterproductive at best, and economically/medically/innovatively backwards at worst. So how about we move that funding amount beyond the measly 3% line and make a slightly larger investment in things that improve the economy, educate the workforce, and help people.
The NIH is a critical source of funding for research conducted by scientists at medical schools and other research institutions. It is also a driver of economic growth and jobs. Pennsylvania ranks among the top states in the nation as a recipient of NIH funding due to the presence of several top-tier research universities in the state.
Source: bobcasey.com
Source: bobcasey.com
Counterarguments
As long as medical personnel are trained in medical schools owned by drug companies and similar interests, conventional medicine will remain hugely incompetent. The drug paradigm assumes that natural methods are ineffective, when, in reality, they are highly effective, while the drug approach and similar toxic approaches have serious side effects that kill many thousands of people each year.
Conventional medical science is somewhat competent in some areas, like stem cell research, which would be worth supporting, but not by FORCED taxation, which is theft.
Conventional medical science is somewhat competent in some areas, like stem cell research, which would be worth supporting, but not by FORCED taxation, which is theft.
1 Topic
Discussion
Related Ideas
| Double the existing R&D tax credit to incentivize life sciences R&D for businesses and innovators More detail | |
|
|
|
See How It Works!




Doesn't the NIH help the biotech industry? If so ...