News for the Multiple Sclerosis Community

NIH Estimated MS Funding Declines

Please note the levels of funding expected for MS research in the future. Do you agree that we should be pushing congress, president, etc. to increase the amounts for research as much as possible?

art: I'll take this posting as another opportunity to present my case that we should not just assume that more funding equals better results. I wrote up my thoughts on this a while back, you can read them here.

Yet another reason to vote for Barack Obama is that his wife's father had MS. Id say that makes him more aware of MS and other chronic illnesses.

You make good points, art. But there's no way that justifies less funding being a positive.

art's picture

Explain, please. Just stating the negation of a point does not refute it.

***
Art Mellor, Accelerated Cure Project for MS, art-msnews -at- acceleratedcure.com

It depends what the choices are:

a) less money, better allocation
b) less money, no change in allocation
c) more money, better allocation
d) more money, no change in allocation

Could (a) be a better choice then (d)? Yes. But it doesn't seem that (a) or (c) are on the table. With that in mind, (d) is much preferable to (b).

art's picture

But that is sort of defeatist - and I'm not there yet. Don't you think that congress would prefer to dictate (a) than just yield to (d)?

And you left off the obvious choices with no change in money. I would even go so far as to say that (b) is better than (d) since some form of natural selection could possibly take place and create better science. So much of what gets funded is garbage and contaminates the pool of published experiments. We need the equivalent of big layoffs.

We've tried (d) (read my essay) - it didn't work. So let's try something different.

***
Art Mellor, Accelerated Cure Project for MS, art-msnews -at- acceleratedcure.com

Push, push, push! The opposite is preposterous.