PAYDIRT! Peer Review: NIH PANEL URGES OVERHAUL...
berezin at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca
Wed Jun 5 21:20:06 EST 1996
On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, Bert Gold wrote:
> >From Science, 272, page 1257, 31 May 1996
> by Eliot Marshall
> Peer Review: NIH PANEL URGES OVERHAUL OF THE RATING
> SYSTEM FOR GRANTS
> first paragraph only:
> "Choosing winners from among the 30,000 biomedical scientists who seek
> federal grants each year is a delicate task, especially when more than
> three-quarters of grant proposals now get rejected.
On the basis of this fact it appears clear that NIH should
be shut down altogether. Any organization which deems
THREE FOURTH (!) of its clientele to be incompetent (giving
them zero grants) is itself grossly incompetent.
Its would be socially much better for your country if the present
NIH budget (I guess, at least 10 billions per year) will be used
for the direct health care of those ( 25 millions ?) who currently
don't have any medical coverage. At least, some lives will be saved.
And let other countries (perhaps 3rd world countries) worry about the
'general progress of medical knowledge'. They will likely do a much
better job on this. The present lousy 'unfund almost all of them' NIH
system is highly unlikely capable to deliver anything realy worthy
More information about the Bioforum