Grant & Growth #1

Welcome {{first_name}} ! Thanks for being here for the very first edition!

TL;DR: funding fewer early career investigators and funding them better may help save a generation of scientists in the US.

In this first edition of Grant & Growth, I feel I need to start with where we are in science today, in the US. In a recent careers update, Science described the short-term mayhem that is being caused by abrupt and deep funding cuts—actual and still anticipated—across many agencies, with NSF and NIH being of particular relevance to biomedicine. The list is familiar - funding loss, job loss, concerns about the future and all the feels that go with it.

The funding cuts are, of course, reversible by a future Administration, and even before that, Congress may soften the blow. It could lead to a gradual reversal of the current dire situation, but it may not as a lasting effect of today’s chaos is uncertainty. Even early career scientists who are doing well—getting fellowships, publishing significant advances in their field—rightly worry about what is ahead. Now that science is political in the US, who can see beyond the next election?

The likely decline in individuals pursuing science and academic careers, while horrific, doesn't have to be entirely devastating. Attracting the right talent from diverse backgrounds requires addressing the uncertainty problem. Drawing on my experience at the NCI's Center for Cancer Training, I believe funding mechanisms defining clear paths from graduate education to independence can restore a measure of certainty. This investment should extend beyond financial support to include supportive cohort networks, career development, and personal growth opportunities. One such path is represented by the F99/K00 and K99/R00 and then ESI status.

We need more such pathways, as there are many different biomedical careers, and the funding mechanisms that create them must be fiercely protected if we don’t want to lose a whole generation of talent.

Grant Submission Deadlines

A recent post on LinkedIn from iPEC* inspired me - and kinda summed up the last 6 months of my life at NCI, where my values and what I was suddenly asked to witness and participate in were no longer the same

This resonated with me so hard - my last 6 months at NCI were not very busy, as so much was shut down, on hold, frozen. But I felt burned out - and it was the extreme energy tax of being misaligned.

Now, in my new direction, while I feel a bit like I am walking an unfamiliar path, I am totally aligned - supporting scientists, supporting science is 💯 Oliver.

Are you aligned? If you are willing to share your take, please email me at [email protected].

*I am training in the iPEC Core Energy Coaching approach - they are a coach training organization.

According to a news release from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine NIH will cease exclusively funding animal-based research projects and will emphasize ‘nonanimal’ methods in all new funding opportunities.

This initiative was formalized during a July 7th workshop and is driven by a commitment to prioritize human biology in research, pointing to the fact that often advances in model systems do not translate well into human medicine. It aims to expedite the development of cures and treatments, reduce drug development costs, and uphold ethical standards by minimizing animal suffering.

Key Points:

The New York Times reports (gift article link) that hundreds of graduate students are writing to their hometown newspapers to defend their research, as the Trump administration drastically reduces science funding.

This grassroots campaign, known as the McClintock Letters, aims to raise awareness about the vital contributions of scientific research in various fields, highlighting personal stories that connect science to everyday life. The initiative reflects a broader concern among young scientists about the communication gap between researchers and the public regarding the necessity and value of their work.