Reposted by Kelly Lane
Kelly Lane
@aklane.bsky.social
328 followers 344 following 270 posts
Assistant Professor | DBER Scholar | at UMN | Biology Teaching & Learning |studying essentialism in undergrad bio classrooms and modes of mentorship in graduate students | views are my own | she/her 🏳️🌈
![Study 2 Intervention Materials
Base Intervention Text
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) provide funding for scientific research that
leads to major breakthroughs for cancer, diabetes, dementia, heart disease, infectious
diseases, stroke, mental illness, and more.
NIH funding is also an excellent financial investment. For every dollar NIH invests in
research, an average of $2.56 of economic activity is returned–a gain of over 250%.
The White House recently ordered major changes to NIH funding, which would take
back funds already promised to the states. States have sued to challenge the order,
arguing that the changes are unlawful.
[page break]
There are two major sources of cuts to NIH funding, which will result in current and
future losses.
First, many NIH grants for health research have already been cancelled, interrupting
ongoing studies and clinical trials. These cancelled grants are projected to result in
economic losses of $4.9 Billion and over 21,000 jobs.
Second, another change would greatly reduce NIH funding that covers “indirect
costs” of research. These funds help pay for essential facilities, equipment, skilled staff,
and safety checks needed across many research projects. Medical research would not be
possible without funding to cover indirect costs. In the future, this proposed change to
funding for indirect costs of research would reduce the U.S. economy by about $16
Billion and over 68,000 jobs every year.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:c5xrowexysrnn6rn6piltqjz/bafkreid62fezp32bbl53u4iwhrwttks7rwcdbbfqatklh35wmyxzq6o73i)
